9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (8) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s entitled to the benefit of the allowances under sections 32(1)(v) and 33(l)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? " The question to be answered becomes very easy if the correspondence that ensued between the assessee and the Department of Tourism is carefully gone through and thus a reference could have been avoided. The assessee is a hotel, "Sun-n-Sea", established at Visakhapatnam for which approval was sought for from the Department of Tourism, which was accorded on November 6, 1965, stating "your hotel project is approved by the Government". It is further clarified by the Department of Tourism, by its letter dated March 10/ 12, 1975, as under : "Sub :-Approval for the purpose of sections 32(1)(v) and 33 (1 ) (b) (B) (ii), 80 B and 80 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion under section 32(1)(v) and development rebate under section 33(l)(b)." On appeal, however, very rightly, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reversed the order of the Income-tax Officer and granted the necessary relief in view of the position as it obtained under the letters dated March 12, 1975, and March 9, 1978, of the Department of Tourism not only under sections 80J and 32(1)(v) but also under section 33(l)(b)(B)(ii) as well. On further appeal, this was confirmed by the Appellate Tribunal and thereafter at the instance of the Revenue, the question is referred for our opinion. Before adjudicating, the letter dated October 17, 1978, addressed to the managing director of the hotel concerned by the Income-tax Officer may be noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the subsequent two letters as aforesaid are concerned, it is not known as to how and under what powers the Department of Tourism sought to issue such letters at all. The benefit of approval conferred on the assessee-hotel as early as in the year 1975 being reinforced after three years in 1978, by a stroke of pen and that too on an imaginary basis that the said benefit was said to have been conferred by oversight, is sought to be modified. When originally the benefit had been expressly conferred on the assessee and the same was followed three years thereafter, later, in the name of so-called clarification, the same position is sought to be given go-by by merely stating that it was by oversight. The question of oversight obviously does no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
