9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f sub-section (2), it should fall either under the category of "splitting up of existing unit" or under the category of "reconstruction of the existing unit". Both in the case of splitting up and in the case of reconstruction, there is no expansion. The expression "expansion", as such, is not used in clause (i).It is not the case of the Revenue that the case of the appellant is covered either by clause (ii) or that the appellant does not satisfy the conditions prescribed in any of the three clauses viz., (iii), (iv) or (v). Therefore, the presumption on the part of the respondent that the benefit under section 80 IA would not apply unless there is a new Undertaking is not traceable to sub-section (2). Clause (b) of sub-section (2) of sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w 650 TPD Kiln at their already existing R.R.Nagar factory premises making an investment of ₹ 24.96 crores. 4. The Return was processed under section 143(1)(a) and a notice was issued under sub-section (2) of section 143. An order of assessment was passed on 24.3.1997 disallowing the claim for deduction under section 80 IA. 5. The appellant filed a statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 21.4.1997. The appeal was dismissed on 29.8.1997 forcing the appellant to file a further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 6. When the aforesaid appeal that related to assessment year 1994-95 was pending before the Tribunal, yet another assessment order came to be passed on 31.3.1999 in relation to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions of law were framed. On 28.4.2005, TC(A) No.190 of 2005 was admitted and this Court framed only two questions of law. These two questions of law were exactly the same as the questions of law (1) and (2) framed in TC(A) No.570 of 2004. 10. However, when the appeals were taken up for disposal today, Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, learned counsel for the appellant made an endorsement in TC(A) No.570 of 2004 to the effect that questions of law (3) and (4) are not pressed. 11. As a consequence, the following two questions of law alone arise for consideration in both the appeals: (1) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the appellant company is entitled to relief under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar date. 14. Sub-section (2) of Section 80 IA lists out 5 conditions which, if satisfied, would make an industrial undertaking, eligible for the benefit under Sub-section (2). Those five conditions are: (i) The industrial undertaking should not have been formed by splitting up or by reconstruction of a business already in existence. (ii) The industrial undertaking should not have been formed by transfer to a new business of machinery or premises previously used for any other purpose. (iii) The industrial undertaking manufactures or produces any article or anything not being an article or thing specified in the Eleventh Schedule or operates one or more cold storage plant or plants in any part of India. (iv) It begins to manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ression expansion , as such, is not used in clause (i). 19. It is not the case of the Revenue that the case of the appellant is covered either by clause (ii) or that the appellant does not satisfy the conditions prescribed in any of the three clauses viz., (iii), (iv) or (v). Therefore, the presumption on the part of the respondent that the benefit under section 80 IA would not apply unless there is a new Undertaking is not traceable to sub-section (2). 20. Clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 80 IA defines an industrial undertaking to have the same meaning as assigned to it in the Explanation to section 33B. The Explanation to section 33B reads as follows:- In this section, industrial undertaking means any undertaking which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Act, 1958. The charging section viz., section 3(1) of the Bombay Electricity Duty Act, 1958 specifically used the expression new industrial undertaking under sub-clause (b) of clause (iii) of sub-section (2) of section 3. But, as we have pointed out earlier, the adjective new is not used in this case. Section 80 IA has been enacted in such a manner that it is a complete code in itself and it does not call for any extraneous aid to interpret the expressions found therein. As a matter of fact, sub-section (2) lays down three conditions that should be fulfilled and two conditions which will disqualify a person from claiming the benefit. Therefore, except looking at the plain language of section 80 IA (2) read with the Explanation to Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
