2015 (5) TMI 656 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Eligibility of deduction u/s 80-IA - activities undertaken by the assessee do not fall within Clause (d) of the Explanation to 80- IA(4) defining the term infrastructure facilities - notice under section 153A challenged - Held that:- In the present case, the notice under section 153A is founded on search. If there is no incriminating material found during the search, then, the Special Bench was right in holding that the power under section 153A being not expected to be exercised routinely, should be exercised if the search reveals any incriminating material. If that is not found, then, in relation to the second phase of three years, there is no warrant for making an order within the meaning of this provision. In any event, the issue stands concluded by a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Nagpur vs. M/s. Murli Agro Products Limited [2010 (10) TMI 1052 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] . It is, therefore, apparent that the law laid down by this Court is binding on the Revenue. If that is binding then the questions of law and with regard to applicability of section 153A need to be answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Income from ICDs - whether qualify for the deduction under Section 80IA(4)(i) of the Act read with the Explanation (d)? - Held that:- When the proposal to set up a CFS has been accepted by the Government, there is no requirement of either a specific agreement as contended by Mr. Suresh Kumar. Nor can it be said that by virtue of any certification of the JNPT and its subsequent withdrawal the position undergoes any change. Once the facility is nothing but a infrastructural facility set up and within the precincts of the port, then, considering and even otherwise having considered its proximity to the sea port and its activities that we have no doubt and it can be safely concluded that the deduction admissible under sub-section (4) of section 80-IA can be claimed by both the ICDs and CFSs.

We do not think that the view taken by the Tribunal is in any way perverse or runs contrary to the language of sub-section (4) of section 80-IA or the object of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as a whole. Once such a conclusion is reached, then, it is not necessary to refer to any other material, particularly any circulars of the Board or otherwise or the certificates issued by the authorities. Even their contents need not be referred to. We are of the view that the extensive reasoning in the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court and which finds approval even of the High Court of Madras and with which we broadly agree that the substantial questions of law on both counts need to be answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.