Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (1) TMI 1189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd registered as contemplated by the Transfer of Property Act, the Registration Act, etc. - the revisionist which is a private limited Company engaged in the manufacture and sale of Diesel, Engines, Generating Sets, Alternators etc. had purchased the land and building for establishing a new unit through registered agreement to sale - Vacant possession of the land and building had been given to the revisionist on 20.10.1986 on the basis of the agreement of sale dated 20.10.1986 - the revisionist under the registered agreement to sale had entered into possession of the land and building and the agreement to sale was registered on 20.10.1986, thus, the revisionist would be entitled for the grant of exemption from 20.10.1986 to 22.12.1991 – Decided in favour of revisionist assessee. - Trade Tax Revision No. - 154 of 1999 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2014 - Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,JJ. For the Applicant : P. Agarwal For the Respondent : C.S.C. ORDER This Trade Tax Revision arises out of the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal dated 24.5.1999 whereby the Tribunal has partly allowed the appeal of the revisionist holding that he is entitled for exemption for 5 years under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dated 24.5.1999 and the order of the appellate authority dated 19.7.1999 was set aside and a direction was issued to the Divisional Level Committee, Agra to issue eligibility certificate to the appellant unit for the grant of tax exemption under Section 4-A of the Act for the period from 14.8.1987 to 22.12.1991. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri Sanjeev Shankdhar, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the opposite party. The submission of Shri Pradeep Agarwal, learned counsel for the revisionist is that admittedly in pursuance of the agreement to sale, the revisionist had entered into possession of the land and the building in question and agreement to sale was also registered on 20.10.1986. No doubt the sale deed was executed on 26.6.1987 and was registered on 14.8.1987 but the revisionist being in possession of the property in question he would be entitled for the benefit of exemption under Section 4-A of the Act from 20.10.1986 i.e. the date of registration of the agreement to sale and the date he came into possession of the property in question and therefore the Tribunal had clearly erred in partly allowing his appeal and d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (I) 'new unit' during the period ending with March 31, 1990 means an industrial undertaking set-up by a dealer on or after October 1, 1982 but not later than March 31,1990- (a) ?................... (b) ?.................. (c) on land or building or both owned or taken on lease for period of not less than seven years by such dealer or allotted to such dealer by any Government company or any corporation owned or controlled by the Central of the State Government; (d) ?...................... (e) ?...................... The word owned has been interpreted by the Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Mineral Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1999) 239 ITR 775 (SC). For determining as to what 'ownership' means the Supreme Court has referred to the meaning of the word as expressed in the Black's Law Dictionary (6th Edition), Dias on Jurisprudence (4th edition, at page 400) and Stroud's Judicial Dictionary. For the sake of brevity it is not necessary to quote the dictionary meaning as they have already been dealt with by the Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. (supra). However, the Supreme Court has relied upon its earlier decision .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he owner of the buildings though a formal deed of title may not have been executed and registered as contemplated by the Transfer of Property Act, the Registration Act, etc. Building owned by the assessee the expression as occurring in section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act means the person who having acquired possession over the building in his own right uses the same for the purposes of the business or profession though a legal title has not been conveyed to him consistently with the requirements of laws such as the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act, etc., but nevertheless is entitled to hold the property to the exclusion of all others. The Supreme Court further in Mysore Mineral Ltd has held as under: It is well-settled that there cannot be two owners of the property simultaneously and in the same sense of the term. The intention of the Legislature in enacting section 32 of the Act would be best fulfilled by allowing deduction in respect of depreciation to the person in whom for the time being vests the dominion over the building and who is entitled to use it in his own right and is using the same for the purposes of his business or profession. Assigning a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... one month and four days from 27.3.1990. The judgment in the case of Harswarup Drum Udyog (supra) has also been relied upon by Shri Sanjeev Shankdhar, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel in support of his submissions and was also relied upon by the Tribunal. However, in the case of Harswarup Drum Udyog (supra) it has not come on the record anywhere that the Unit had entered into possession of the property which was the subject matter of lease deed whereas in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. (supra) the facts are quite similar to those of the present case namely that the assessee in that case had infact entered into possession of the houses in question the same being allotted to the assessee by the Housing Board, part payment received. The assessee was a private limited Company purchased seven low income group houses from the Housing Board for the use of its staff and also made payment and the allotment of the houses was followed by the delivery of the possession of the Housing Board. In the present case, the revisionist which is a private limited Company engaged in the manufacture and sale of Diesel, Engines, Generating Sets, Alternators etc, had purchased the land and buildi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates