2010 (4) TMI 1074 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 2004-05.
Issue 1: Revision Order under Section 263
The main issue was whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in quashing the revision order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax. The question revolved around the Assessing Officer's view, the distinction between law and fact, and the correction through the revision order under section 263.
Judgment: The Court found that the Tribunal's decision to quash the revision order was justified as the Assessing Officer's interpretation was amenable to correction through the revision order under section 263. Therefore, the first question proposed by the appellant was not necessary to answer.

Issue 2: Infrastructure Facility under Section 80-IA
The second issue concerned whether the automatic traffic signal and pedestrian footbridge would constitute an infrastructure facility as defined in clause (a) of the Explanation below sub-section (4) of section 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Judgment: The Court agreed with the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's interpretation that the automatic traffic signal and pedestrian footbridge would indeed constitute an infrastructure facility as per the explanation to sub-section (4) of Section 80-IA. The Tribunal's view aligned with the definition provided in the Act, and thus, the appeal was dismissed on this ground.

The judgment highlighted the provisions of Section 80-IA, which allow for deductions in computing the total income of an assessee from eligible businesses. The relevant portion of sub-section (4) was cited, emphasizing the conditions for an enterprise to qualify under this section. The explanation defining infrastructure facility was crucial in determining the eligibility for deductions under Section 80-IA.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the infrastructure facility status of the automatic traffic signal and pedestrian footbridge. As a result, the appeal was summarily dismissed, and the stay application was disposed of. The parties were directed to comply with formalities for obtaining a certified copy of the order.