TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AN and P. P. S. JANARTHANA RAJA JJ. Ramachandran for Ms. Anitha Sumanth for the appellant. Mrs. Pushya Sitaraman for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by K. Raviraja Pandian J.- Tax Case Appeal Nos. 112 to 114 of 2004 are filed by raising the following substantial questions of law : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee-company was entitled to exemption under section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee-company has not been formed under specific law for the purpose of development as per the requirements of section 10(20A)? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act and is justified in differing from the view taken by another Bench? 4. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, in so far as there is a decision of another Bench of the Tribunal in the appellant's own case for earlier years, the Tribunal is justified in taking a different view without referring the matter to a Special Bench ?" 3. The facts as culled out of the statement of facts are as under : The appellant in Tax Case No. 205 of 2004 is a State Government undertaking engaged in the promotion of industrial activities and making provision for infrastructure to industries. It has as its various objects, promotion of industrial growth, development of industrial infrastructure for which it a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 205 of 2004 is correct and that of the decision in Tax Case Nos. 112 to 114 of 2004 is not correct. 6. We have heard learned counsel on either side and perused the material available on record. 7. Section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reads as follows : "any income of an authority constituted in India by or under any law enacted either for the purpose of dealing with and satisfying the need for housing accommodation or for the purpose of planning, development or improvement of cities, towns and villages, or for both." 8. It is an admitted case that the assessee is not an authority constituted in India by or under any law enacted either for the purpose of dealing with and satisfying the need for housing accommodation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Court that the U. P. Forest Corporation is a local authority, however remitted back the matter to the authorities concerned to consider whether the U. P. Forest Corporation is entitled to take advantage of the provisions of section 11 of the Income-tax Act. The same treatment may be given to the assessee herein by relegating them to go before the authorities to advance their case that they are entitled to the advantage of the provisions of section 11 of the Act. 11. Here again, we are not able to accept the suggestion made by learned senior counsel for the reason that in that case during the course of assessment proceedings for 1977-78, 1980-81 and 1984-85, the Forest Corporation claimed its status to be that of a local authority ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... correct in coming to the conclusion that the respondent was a local authority and entitled to exemption under section 10(20) of the Act, however relegated the assessees before the authorities to seek the claim under section 11 of the Act. The facts of the present case are not comparable to that of the decision of the Supreme Court so as to grant the relief by way of relegation to the authorities. In that case, the Supreme Court has also given a cautionary note that the High Court would not have entertained the writ petitions and granted the relief. Hence, we are not able to accept the contention and the contention is rejected. 12. The reliance made in Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 414 (SC) by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
