COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-I vs. M/S. NEZONE INDUSTRIES LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/209/2017HC GauhatiGAHC01007233201711 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 admission made by the appellant (Revenue) that the Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC), had ruled that transport subsidies are eligible for exemption under Sections 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue acknowledged that further adjudication of the present appeal was unnecessary in light of this binding precedent. Therefore, the Tribunal ordered the dismissal of the appeal, applying the ratio decidendi from the Meghalaya Steels Ltd. judgment. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

This appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, Kolkata, against 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 Sections 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. During the hearing, the appellant's counsel admitted that the Supreme Court had recently ruled in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. that transport subsidies are eligible for exemption under Sections 80-IB and 80-IC. Consequently, the appellant conceded that further adjudication of this appeal was unnecessary.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee is entitled to exemption from income tax on the transport subsidy received, under Section 80-IB and Section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee as none appeared for the respondent. Revenue's Contention: The appellant (Revenue) conceded that the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act on account of transport subsidy, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC). The Revenue argued that the adjudication of the appeal was unnecessary and that 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 209/2017 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN (Ajit Singh, CJ) Mr. Sonjay Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department for th e 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 (Central )-I, Kolkata has 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 and other subsidies. Therefore adjudication of this Ap peal is contended to be unnecessary and the departmental lawyer fairly submits t hat this Appeal should be dismissed on account of the judgment rendered by the S upreme 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 →