2018 (4) TMI 749 - HC - Income Tax

Claim of deduction u/s 80IA - Held that - Container Freight Station (CFS) run by the respondent-assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act as an infrastructure facility. Thus, upholding the view of the Commissioner of Income-Tax Appeals (CIT (A)). This by following the decisions of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in M/s. All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012 (7) TMI 222 - ITAT MUMBAI(SB)) And the decision of the Regular Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Vs. ACIT (2012 (8) TMI 893 - ITAT MUMBAI). - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging the Tribunal's order allowing deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2009-10. Dispute over the applicability of a CBDT Circular/Clarification dated 6th January, 2011.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deduction under Section 80IA
The Appeals challenge the Tribunal's order allowing the deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The Tribunal upheld the claim of deduction for the Container Freight Station (CFS) run by the respondent-assessee as an infrastructure facility. This decision was based on the view of the Commissioner of Income-Tax Appeals and supported by previous Tribunal decisions. The Tribunal refused to accept the Revenue's argument against the deduction, citing that the issue had been settled by previous decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court. The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the importance of judicial discipline and adherence to precedents. The Appeals challenging the deduction were dismissed.

Issue 2: Applicability of CBDT Circular/Clarification
The Advocate for the Revenue argued that a previous decision of the Court did not consider a CBDT Circular/Clarification dated 6th January, 2011, and therefore, the decision was incorrect. However, the Court clarified that the previous decision did refer to the Circular/Clarification and made a specific decision after considering it. The Court highlighted that decisions of Co-ordinate Benches are binding and any challenge should be taken to the Apex Court. The Advocate's attempt to reargue the settled issue without obtaining a stay from the Apex Court was criticized by the Court for wasting judicial time. The Court emphasized the need for advocates to act responsibly and respect legal precedents, avoiding unnecessary debates when issues are already settled. The Court dismissed the Appeals, reiterating the importance of uniform application of the law based on judicial discipline and precedents.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to allow the deduction under Section 80IA, emphasizing the importance of following legal precedents and maintaining judicial discipline. The Court dismissed the Appeals, highlighting the need for advocates to act responsibly and avoid rearguing settled issues without valid grounds.