|
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1214 (Karn-HC) : (2020) 421 ITR 0398 : (2020) 312 CTR 0289 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 80-IA
Where assessee having applied for the occupancy certificate along with architect's certificate before the BDA well within the stipulated period of one year, delay caused by the authority in issuing the occupancy certificate would not obliterate the rights of assessee to avail the benefit under section 80-IA(4), therefore action of CBDT instructing to withdraw the approval suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and lacks jurisdiction.
|
Deduction under section 80-IA - Income from development, etc. of Industrial Park - Assessee applied for completion certificate within stipulated time -
Assessee was engaged in development of industrial park for providing facilities to IT/ITES sector and operation and maintenance. Predecessor firm of assessee filed 'Form IPS-1' before authority for approval of industrial park under the 'Industrial Park Scheme, 2002' which was granted. The terms and conditions stipulated in the said approval order was indeed accepted by assessee's predecessor and a request was made before authority to issue notification under rule 18C(4) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. It was grievance of assessee that the request of assessee to issue notification under rule 18C(4) has not yielded any positive results. On the contrary, office memorandum issued by CBDT directing to withdraw the approval without providing an opportunity of hearing to assessee was in flagrant violation of principles of natural justice and lacks jurisdiction.Held: It was not in dispute that assessee had applied for the occupancy certificate along with architect's certificate before the BDA well within the stipulated period of, one year as enumerated in condition No. 5 (ii) of the approval under the Scheme 2002. The delay caused by the authority in issuing occupancy certificate would not obliterate the rights of assessee to avail the benefit under section 80-1 A(4) vitiating the very purpose of the approval granted by authority. The action of CBDT instructing to withdraw the approval suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and lacks jurisdiction.
Followed:CIT v. Ceebros Hotels (P) Ltd. (2019) 309 CTR (Mad) 525 : (2019) 179 DTR (Mad) 44 : (2018) 409 ITR 423 (Mad) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 7788 (Mad-HC), Pr. CIT v. Ambey Developer (P) Ltd 2018-TIOL-207 (P&H) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 5209 (P&H-HC)
REFERRED : CIT v. Tametar Corporation (2014) 362 ITR 174 (Guj) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 1397 (Guj-HC)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. :
IN THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|