2017 (2) TMI 1110 - SC - Income Tax

Local authority within the meaning of Section 10(20A) - whether Vidarbh Irrigation Department Corporation is a local authority ? - Held that - Section 10(20A) of the Act stipulates certain kinds of income which are not to be included in total income. This provision came for interpretation before this Court in the case of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation and others v. Commissioner of Income-tax 1997 (8) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court . We find that the High Court in the impugned judgment has referred to the aforesaid judgment and observed that since the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal did not consider the issue in the light of the provisions of the Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation Act, 1997 under which the respondent-assessee has been constituted as well as the provisions of Maharashtra Irrigation Act, 1976 and Bombay Canal Rules, 1934 the High Court has remanded the case back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. We do not understand as to why the Income Tax Department has preferred the instant appeal against the aforesaid judgment of the High Court where the issue has only been remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. In these circumstances we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and dismiss this appeal.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the respondent, Vidarbh Irrigation Department Corporation, is a local authority under Section 10(20A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The central issue in this case pertains to determining whether the respondent, Vidarbh Irrigation Department Corporation, qualifies as a local authority within the scope of Section 10(20A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 10(20A) outlines specific types of income that are excluded from total income. Even though this provision was omitted from the Act with effect from April 1, 2003, the assessment period under consideration predates this amendment, making it relevant. Section 10(20A) exempts income of an authority established in India by law for housing accommodation, city planning, development, or village improvement. The interpretation of this provision was elucidated in a previous case involving the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation, emphasizing that income falling within this clause is exempt from income tax. The High Court, in the present case, referred to this interpretation and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for reconsideration in light of the relevant legislative enactments governing the respondent's establishment.

The High Court's judgment underscored the dual elements of Section 10(20A): the first part pertains to authorities established for housing accommodation needs, while the second part relates to those established for city, town, or village planning, development, or improvement. The Court emphasized that if an authority is constituted under a law for either of these purposes, its income is exempt from tax under Section 10(20A). The Tribunal's initial conclusion was deemed incorrect by the High Court, prompting the remand for fresh consideration in alignment with the VIDC Act, Maharashtra Irrigation Act, 1976, and Bombay Canal Rules, 1934. Despite the Income Tax Department's appeal against the High Court's decision, which merely remanded the case for review, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the judgment, dismissing the appeal and ruling no costs to be awarded.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's decision maintained the High Court's directive to reevaluate the matter in light of the relevant legislative provisions, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of whether the respondent qualifies as a local authority under Section 10(20A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.