Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 1068 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IA(2)(iv)(c) - Industrially Backward Area or not - entitled to claim deduction relying upon the notification bearing No.714E dated 07.10.1997 - HELD THAT:- In order to avail benefit of deduction, twin conditions have to be satisfied, namely, that industry should be located in Industrial Backward District as prescribed by the Central Government vide Notification in the Official Gazette and the aforesaid Industry has to commence the production during the period beginning from 1st October 1994 and ending on 31st March 1999. Admittedly in the instant case, the industrial undertaking of the appellant-assessee is not located in the Industrial Backward District, which has been mentioned in the Notification issued by the Central Government. It is pertinent to note here that the first Notification was issued by the State Government on 03rd September 1997, whereas the second Notification was issued on 07th October 1997. In both the aforesaid Notifications, the District in which the industry of the assessee is located has not been mentioned as Industrially Backward District. It is also not in dispute that the assessee had set up the industry before coming into force of the Industry Notification. Therefore, the condition mentioned in Section 80-IA(2)(iv)(c) of the Act that an industrial undertaking should be located within such Industrial Backward District as the Central Government vide Notification prescribed has not admittedly been fulfilled by the assessee. In order to claim the deduction, the assessee has to satisfy the requirements mentioned under the provision, which admittedly the assessee does not fulfill. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled to claim deduction under Section 80-IA(2)(iv)(c) is concerned the same is sans substance. Section 80HH and Section 80-IA(2)(iv)(c) are two different and independent provisions. The decision of TRINITY HOSPITAL. [2003 (1) TMI 29 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] relied upon by respondent is of no assistance to the assessee in the fact situation of the case as the aforesaid decision was based on the concession that once an area is declared to be Industrially Backward Area under Section 80HH (2) of the Act, the same has to be taken under Industrial Backward Area for the purposes of this Act. In other words, the aforesaid decision is based on the concession and there has been no deduction on the issue. Therefore, we do not agree with the view taken by the Honb’le High Court of Rajasthan insofar as it takes a view that once the area declared as backward area under Section 80HH(2) of the Act, the same has to be taken as Industrially Backward Area for the purposes of the Act, as Section 80HH(2) and 80-IA(2)(iv)(c) are separate and independent provisions. Appeal allowed.
|