2017 (9) TMI 1819 - SC - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 80IB / 80IC on account of transport subsidy - HELD THAT - We find that the issue raised in these appeals is covered against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Madras Vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. 2008 (9) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT or in the alternate in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 2016 (3) TMI 375 - SUPREME COURT Therefore the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal(s) of the assessee(s) is allowed.

Summary

Issues: Appeals by Revenue dismissed based on precedent cases; Liberty granted for Revenue to apply if facts differ.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court, comprising Justices A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, granted leave in several Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) and after hearing arguments from counsels, decided on the issues raised in the appeals. The Court noted that the matters in question were already settled against the Revenue based on prior judgments. Specifically, the Court referred to the case of "Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras Vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd." (2008) 9 SCC 337, and alternatively to "Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Meghalaya Steels Ltd." (2016) 3 SCALE 192. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue and allowed the appeal(s) of the assessee(s) involved in the cases.

Moreover, the Court acknowledged the possibility of different facts or issues arising in specific cases. In such instances, the Court granted liberty to the Revenue to submit an appropriate application for further consideration. This provision ensures that if there are unique circumstances or legal points not covered by the existing precedents, the Revenue can seek clarification or redressal by making a separate application to the Court. The judgment, therefore, not only resolves the current appeals but also provides a mechanism for addressing any exceptional situations that may require distinct legal treatment.