Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central –2 passed u/s.263 in C.No.2744/C- 2/2016-17/42 dated 28.03.2018 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate represented on behalf of the Assessee and Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT represented on behalf of the Revenue.
It was submitted by the learned Authorized Representative that for the Assessment Year 2012-13 the assessment was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 31.03.2016 and the assessee was granted benefit of deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act. It was a submission that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax issued a show cause notice u/s.263 on 19.03.2018 and in response to the show cause notice, the assessee had filed a reply dated 23.02.2018, wherein in paragraph 2.9 of the reply it was specifically brought to the attention of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that similar issue had been fully allowed by the ld.CIT(A) and the same was confirmed by the Jurisdictional Tribunal vide dated 12.05.2016 and the order of the Tribunal had further been affirmed by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court vide T.C.(A) Nos.105, dated 27.03.2017, wherein the issue as to whether the Container Freight Station can be termed as an infrastructure facility even after amendment of Section 80-IA and eligible to the deduction u/s.80IA(4) was eligible,had been held in favour of the assessee by following the decision the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs AL Logistics (P) Ltd, reported in 374 ITR 609. It was a submission that this order of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has now attained finality in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1 Vs.
3 -: Container Corporation of India Limited reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 31 (SC), wherein the assessee’s case was also connected. It was a submission that the learned Principle Commissioner of Income Tax had refused to accept the contention of the assessee and had been directed to set aside the assessment order u/s.143(4) r.w.s 153A and had directed the Assessing Officer to conduct enquiries as he deemed fit and to make due verification in accordance with law keeping the observation and direction given by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. It was a submission that the assessee’s Container Freight Station having been held to be eligible for the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the highest court of the country. It was no more an issue which could be considered as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue so as to warrant the invocation of the Section 263 of the Act.
In reply, the learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax .
We have considered the rival submission and perused the materials available on record.
At the outset, it should be appreciated that the deduction u/s. 80IA is eligible for a continuous period of ten assessment years. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has in the case of the assessee for the Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2010-11 confirmed the order of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the assessee’s own case, wherein the assessee has been held to be eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4) in respect of the Container Freight Station.
4 -: The Assessment Year under appeal is 2012-13. This is well within the ten year period. In any case, the issue having settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the assessee’s own case, it cannot be said that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer granting the assessee the benefit of deduction u/s.80IA(4) in respect of the Container Freight Station is an error much less an error which is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the order passed u/s.263 by the ld.CIT is unsustainable on the facts of the present case and in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the assessee’s own case (supra).
In the result, the order passed u/s.263 stands quashed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 13th November, 2019 in Chennai.