Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 2038 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTLiability to Income tax under Article 289 of the Constitution of India - Appellant not carrying on its activities on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra - HELD THAT:- This issue is no longer res integra as it stands concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in Aditya Industrial Area Development Authority [2006 (5) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT] wherein an identical / similar entity to the appellant herein was not extended the benefit of Article 289 of the Constitution of India in the context of Bihar Industrial Development Authority Act, 1974 (Authority Act, 1974). Our attention was particularly drawn to similar / identical provisions in Authority Act, 1974 and the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 to point out the identical nature of the two entities. Therefore, the decision of the Tribunal in CIDCO (supra) was per incurim as the above decision of the Apex Court was not brought to its notice. Further, on facts, this case stands concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in Aditya Industrial Area Development Authority (supra). Thus, the admission of the appeal in the case of CIDCO (supra) by this Court would not on facts of this case, warrant admission of this appeal. (e) Therefore, in face of the Supreme Court decision in Aditya Industrial Area Development Authority (supra) which concludes the issue in the present facts, the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained. Charitable activities - Appeal admitted on the substantial question of law at question no.(ii) above - Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the activities of the appellant is hit by the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act?
|