PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SHREE SHIV SAI STEEL INDUSTRIES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/195/2017HC GauhatiGAHC01011032201707 May 20171 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal should be dismissed. This decision was based on the submission made by the learned standing counsel for the Income Tax Department. The counsel produced a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. reported in (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC). The Revenue's counsel contended that this judgment had finally decided the issue concerning the claim of exemption for transport subsidy in favour of the assessee. Consequently, the Revenue fairly submitted that the appeal should be dismissed in view of the Supreme Court's ruling. The Tribunal, having regard to the ratio in Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (Supra) and the submission of the Revenue, ordered the dismissal of the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

This appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Guwahati-2, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, challenging an order concerning the claim of income tax exemption for transport subsidy received by the assessee. The departmental authorities had previously held that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. The appeal was listed for admission before the ITAT. The Revenue's counsel, Mr. S Saikia, appeared, while none appeared for the respondent assessee. The Revenue's counsel produced a Supreme Court judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC), which he contended had finally decided the issue of transport subsidy exemption in favour of the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC)? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded as the assessee was not represented. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the issue regarding the deduction of tax on account of transport subsidy has been finally decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (Supra) in favour of the assessee. Therefore, the adjudication of the present appeal is unnecessary, and the appeal should be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80-IB,Section 80-IC,Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA 195/2017 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN (Ajit Singh, CJ)

Mr. S Saikia, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department ass isted by Mr. DK Bagchi, learned counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondent.

Heard on admission.

This Appeal relates to the claim of income tax exemption for the transpo rt subsidy amount received by the assessee. The departmental authorities declare d that the assessee is entitled to exemption to tax under Section 80-IB and 80-I C of the Income Tax Act and that is how, the Principal Commissioner of Income Ta x, Guwahati-2, Guwahati has filed this Appeal, under Section 260(A) of the Incom ), we order dismissal of the Appeal.

More judgments on Section 80-IB

All 340 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-IB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →