Commissioner of Income-tax, Guntur v. M/s. Bommidala Enterprises Pvt. Ltd - 2016-LL-0902-10

Citation	2016-LL-0902-10
Appellant Name	Commissioner of Income-tax, Guntur
Respondent Name	M/s. Bommidala Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Court	SUPREME COURT
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	02/09/2016
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	trading activity
Bot Summary:	The question of law that was raised by the appellant-Revenue herein before the High Court was as to whether trading activity carried on by the SEZ unit of the respondent-assessee is to be considered as 'service' eligible for exemption under Section 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A perusal of the order of the High Court shows that this aspect is not considered and brushed aside by merely saying that the Tribunal has held it to be a 'service' and that it is a question of fact. The High Court is in error in not entertaining the said plea and dismissing the appeal of the Revenue by labelling it as a question of fact. We, accordingly, set aside the order of the High Court and remand the case to the High Court to decide the aforesaid question of law. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER Leave granted. The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order. Court Master Court Master Signed order is placed on the file.

IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8774 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 13081 of 2014) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR ... Appellant VERSUS M/S.BOMMIDALA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. ... Respondent ORDER Leave granted. question of law that was raised by appellant-Revenue herein before High Court was as to whether trading activity carried on by SEZ unit of respondent-assessee is to be considered as 'service' eligible for exemption under Section 10AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). It was submission of appellant that for this purpose, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal could not have relied upon definition of 'services' as per SEZ Rules when there is no such provision under Section 10AA of Act. perusal of order of High Court shows that this aspect is not considered and brushed aside by merely saying that Tribunal has held it to be 'service' and that it is question of fact. No doubt, insofar as activity Signature Not Verified carried on by respondent-assessee is concerned, factual Digitally signed by NIDHI AHUJA Date: 2016.09.08 15:41:40 IST Reason: aspects are not in dispute. However, whether that would 1 C.A. No. 8774/ 2016 constitute 'service' within meaning of Section 10AA of Act would be question of law and not question of fact. High Court is, therefore, in error in not entertaining said plea and dismissing appeal of Revenue by labelling it as question of fact. We, accordingly, set aside order of High Court and remand case to High Court to decide aforesaid question of law. Accordingly, appeal stands disposed of. .., J. [ A.K. SIKRI ] ., J. [ DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD ] New Delhi; September 02, 2016. 2 C.A. No. 8774/ 2016 ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.11 SECTION IIIA SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 13081/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01/10/2013 in ITA No. 461/2013 passed by High Court of A.P. at Hyderabad) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR Petitioner(s) VERSUS M/S.BOMMIDALA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. Respondent(s) (With interim relief and office report) Date : 02/09/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, SG. Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Adv. Mr. S. A. Haseeb, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. A. Subba Rao, Adv. UPON hearing counsel Court made following ORDER Leave granted. appeal stands disposed of in terms of signed order. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty) Court Master Court Master [Signed order is placed on file.] 3 Commissioner of Income-tax, Guntur v. M/s. Bommidala Enterprises Pvt. Ltd

Metadata

Judgment