TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 922X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2008-09. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 7.12.2015 to consider the following substantial questions of law: i. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is eligible for claim of deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii) even though the conditions laid down by the Ministry of Commerce for the same have not been fulfilled by the assessee as noted by the assessing officer after physical verification of the premises and recorded perverse finding. ii. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in placing reliance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who by an order dated 28.03.2013, by placing reliance on the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru in the case of PIRAMAL PROJECTS (P) LTD., held that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Act and directed the Assessing Officer to grant the deduction. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee. Being aggrieved, the revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, by an order dated 18.07.2014, dismissed the appeal preferred by the revenue. In the aforesaid factual background, the revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 'DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), BANGALORE Vs. ACE MULTI AXES SYSTEMS LTD.' 400 ITR 141 (SC) AND 'RAMNATH & CO. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX' (2020) 116 TAXMANN.COM 885 (SC). 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee was granted approval by Government of India for setting up industrial park under the Industrial Park Scheme, 2002 and under the aforesaid proposal, 4 units were to be set up. It is further submitted that a person setting up an industrial park is entitled to tax benefit under clause 5(i) only after proposed number of units are put up. It is further submitted that the approval has been granted to the assessee on revised application under the Scheme and f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he total allocable area. It is also pointed out that number of tenants has no co-relation with number of units and a single tenant can operate distinct units and merger of tenant company is inconsequential. It is also pointed out that the decision relied on by the revenue in the case of ACE MULTI AXES SYSTEMS, supra, is not applicable to the fact situation of the case. It is also pointed out that the decision relied by the revenue in the case of RAMNATH AND CO. supra, supports the case of the assessee as the assessee fulfills the criteria laid down in order to claim deduction. 6. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to take note of Section 80IA(4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Scheme which is known as Industrial Park Scheme, 2002. Clause(2)(i) of the Scheme defines the expression 'unit' which means any separate and distinct entity for the purpose of one or more State or Central Tax law. Clause 6 of the Scheme deals with criteria for automatic approval. Clause 6(f) provides that no single unit referred to in Column No.2 (of the table given in sub paragraph (b) of paragraph 6) shall occupy more than 50% of the allocable industrial area of an industrial model town or industrial park or growth centre. Clause 7 deals with non-automatic approval. There cannot be any dispute with the legal proposition that in order to claim the benefit of deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Act, the conditions mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|