Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. AL Logistics P Ltd.

2016 (7) TMI 210 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Disallowance made under Section 80IA(4) - development of the infrastructure facilities or not - income from the container freight station (CFS) - appellant was declared as custodian of the containers and the imported goods received in containers from Haldia Dock Complex and the goods meant for export through Haldia Port via their CFS - Tribunal deleted the addition - Held that:- Substantial questions of law have already been answered against the revenue in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

should not entertain a review petition. The High Court also cannot reverse and modify the order impugned before the Supreme Court. But the judgment rendered by the High Court is not erased. - Decided in favour of assessee - Tax Case Appeal No. 405 of 2016 - Dated:- 21-6-2016 - Mr. Justice S. Manikumar And D. Krishnakumar For the Appellant : Mr. T. Ravikumar JUDGMENT ( Judgment of the Court was made by S. Manikumar, J. ) Facts of the case deduced from the material on record are that the responde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(4) holding that the appellant's facility cannot be defined as Infrastructure facility or fit into the definition of either Port or Inland Port as per the provisions of the Act. The AO referred to the provisions of Section 80-IA and stated that all the defined infrastructure facility will not be eligible to claim deduction but which fulfills all the conditions set out in Section 80-IA 4 (i) (a), (b) & (c) will only be eligible. He also referred to Circular No.717 dated 14/8/1995 and stat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Commerce, Appellant's above facility was notified as CFS by Commissioner of Customs, Kolkotta vide public notice 84/2003 on 10/11/2003 and the said CFS as 'customs area'. The said authority declared the appellant as custodian of the containers and the imported goods received in containers from Haldia Dock Complex and the goods meant for export through Haldia Port via their CFS at the above address vide public Notice B.No.85/03 dt 10/11/03. Import/Export procedures of appellant' .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat the conditions prescribed u/s. 80IA (4) (i) i.e., assessee did not enter into any agreement with the Govt. c). the assessee does not own any immovable property. The appellant further stated that on similar issue in appellant's own case for A.Y.2009-10 the Hon'ble ITAT Chennai vide ITA No.469/Mds/2014 dt.14/7/2014 has decided the issue in favour of the appellant and the same was confirmed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Tax Case (Appeal) No.1031 to 2014 dated 23/12/204 [2015-T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Madras High Court, the ground is allowed. 2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1 (1), Chennai has preferred an appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. Taking note of an order on an identical issue, decided in the assessee's own case, in I.T.A.No.469/MDS/2014, dated 14th July 2014 and following the Delhi High Court judgment rendered in Container Corporation of India Ltd., Vs. ACIT {346 ITR 140 (Del .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for deduction under Section 80IA(4)? (iii). Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by deleting the disallowance made under Section 80IA(4) especially when the Assessee has not fulfilled the conditions stipulated under Section 80IA(4) (i) (b)? (iv). Whether the Tribunal was right in not considering the amendment to Section 80IA(4) Explanation which was introduced with effect from 1/4/2002 whereby the word any other public facility of similar nature was omitted and thereby wrongly allowed a deduct .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

decision is under challenge before the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) CC No.9566 of 2015. He also submitted that the decision rendered by the Delhi High Court in Container Corporation of India Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & CIT, reported in {(2012) 81 CCH 0087 DelHC and followed in the case of AL Logistics Pvt Ltd., is also under challenge in Appeal (Civil) No.8900 of 2012. 5. Based on the website information of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Mr.T.Ravikumar, learn .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others Vs. State of Kerala and Another {(2000) 6 SCC 359} on the doctrine of merger, would be applicable to the instant case and in the normal circumstances, when an issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, matters are entertained and kept alive, Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax, seeks for admission of the instant appeal. 7. Admittedly, facts and law, decided in Container Corporation of India Limited Vs. Ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er order of the High Court was sought to be subjected to exercise of appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court by the State of Kerala wherein it did not succeed. The prayer contained in the petition seeking leave to appeal to this Court was found devoid of any merits and hence dismissed. The order is a non-speaking and unreasoned order. All that can be spelled out is that the Court was not convinced of the need for exercising its appellate jurisdiction. The order of the High Court dated 17/12/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

have been admitted by the Supreme Court if leave to appeal was granted. The constitutional validity of sub-section 92) of Section 8-C has not been challenged. Though, Shri.T.L.V.Iyer, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant made a feeble attempt at raising such a plea at the time of hearing but unsuccessfully, as such a plea has not so far been raised before the High Court, also not in the petition filed before this Court. 9. Though Container Corporation's case and A.L.Logistics's .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version