9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 359 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IA(4)(iii) - CIT(A) directing the AO to treat the rental income from the letting out of property as 'business income' - HELD THAT - The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant has produced a letter in Corporate Circle 4(2)/2017-18 dated 05.1.2018 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai-34 stating that the approval notification from the Central Board of Direct Taxes in respect of deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act has been received for the respondent and he submits that he has been instructed to withdraw these appeals. The said submission of the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue is recorded. The letter dated 05.1.2018 is placed on record. The above tax case appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. The substantial questions of law are left open.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of rental income as 'business income' or 'income from house property' under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Eligibility criteria for claiming deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 3. Application of judicial precedents in determining the nature of rental income. 4. Requirement to establish rental income is derived from eligible business for deduction under Section 80IA. Analysis: 1. The primary issue in this case revolved around the classification of rental income from property letting as either 'business income' or 'income from house property' under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue contested the Appellate Tribunal's decision directing the Assessing Officer to treat the rental income as 'business income' and allow deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii). The Tribunal's decision was challenged based on the interpretation of the nature of the income. 2. Another significant issue raised was the eligibility of the assessee for claiming deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The Appellate Tribunal had to consider whether the assessee had fulfilled the conditions stipulated under the Industrial Park Scheme-2002, particularly regarding the development and maintenance of an industrial park by a specified date. The Tribunal's decision hinged on the fulfillment of these criteria for claiming the deduction. 3. The Appellate Tribunal's decision was also scrutinized concerning the application of judicial precedents, notably the Apex Court's decision in Keyaram Hotels Vs. CIT and the Madras High Court's decision. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal had erred in not following the established legal principles outlined in these judgments, leading to a perceived inconsistency in the treatment of rental income. 4. Furthermore, the issue of whether the rental income qualified for deduction under Section 80IA without a clear finding that the income was 'derived from' the eligible business of the assessee was deliberated. The Tribunal's decision was questioned for potentially disregarding the requirement that the income must be directly linked to the eligible business to qualify for the deduction under Section 80IA, as per Supreme Court judgments. In conclusion, the Revenue's appeals were withdrawn based on the receipt of an approval notification from the Central Board of Direct Taxes regarding the deduction under Section 80IA(4) for the respondent. As a result, the tax case appeals were dismissed as withdrawn, leaving the substantial questions of law open, and the connected CMPs were also dismissed without costs.
|
