PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GREY STONE ISPAT LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/151/2017HC GauhatiGAHC01016120201721 March 20171 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal, in view of the submission made by the Income Tax Department and having regard to the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC), ordered the dismissal of the appeal. The Supreme Court's decision established that transport subsidy is eligible for exemption under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. The reasoning was that the departmental appeal was rendered unnecessary by this binding precedent. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

This appeal was filed by the Income Tax Department under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 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 heard by the ITAT for admission. None appeared for the respondent assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee is entitled to exemption from tax on the transport subsidy amount received under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded as none appeared. Revenue: The Revenue, through its counsel, fairly admitted that the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC) has held that an assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act on account of transport subsidy. Therefore, the Revenue contended that the adjudication of this appeal is unnecessary and it 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 151/2017 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN (Ajit Singh, C.J.) Mr. P. Saikia, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. S. Saikia, learn ed Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) ha s filed this Appeal, under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act. During the course of hearing, it was fairly admitted on behalf of the ap pellant that the Supreme Court recently in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghal aya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC), has held that the assessee is entitle d to exemption to tax under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act on acc ount of transport subsidy. Therefore adjudication of this Appeal is contended to be unnecessary and the departmental lawyer fairly submits that this Appeal shou ld be dismissed on account of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court, in the Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (Supra). In view of the above submission made on behalf of the Income Tax Departm ent and having regard to the ratio in Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (Supra), we order di smissal 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 →