Kanan Devan Hills Plantations Company Pvt. Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 1(2), Kochi
[Citation -2017-LL-1116-4]

Citation 2017-LL-1116-4
Appellant Name Kanan Devan Hills Plantations Company Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent Name The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 1(2), Kochi
Court HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/11/2017
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags infrastructure facility • industrial undertaking • special economic zone • written down value • eligible business • power generation • capital employed • industrial park • tea estate • person
Bot Summary: Rest of the issues either held in assessee s favour or not pressed by assessee itself, only one issue remained for the Tribunal to decide: Is the Assessing Officer s disallowing the deduction under Section 80-IA justified ITA No. 48/2015 :3: Submissions: Assessee s: 6. Sri Joseph Markos, the learned Senior Counsel for the assessee, has submitted that the assessee has fulfilled all the eligibility criteria prescribed under Section 80-IA of the Act. So whatever the assessee has is only used machinery or plant, and that cannot entail the assessee to any tax concessions. The Revenue frontally attacks the assessee s claim for deduction on two grounds: the machinery on the plant existing before the alleged renovation or modernisation was used by the assessee s predecessor; the conditions under Section 80-IA are cumulative, but the assessee has failed to prove that it has fulfilled all those conditions. For the purposes of clause, any machinery or plant which was used outside India by any person other than the assessee shall not be regarded as machinery or plant previously used for any purpose, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely: such machinery or plant was not, at any time previous to the date of the installation by the assessee, used in India; such machinery or plant is imported into India from any country outside India; and no deduction on account of depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. The restriction under clause will not apply to the machinery or plant used abroad by any other person than the assessee, if these conditions are fulfilled: the machinery or plant was not used in India before its installation by the assessee; the machinery or plant is imported into India; and no depreciation is allowed or allowable under this Act on the machinery or plant in computing the total income of any person for any period before the assessee installed the machinery or plant. Undoubtedly, the assessee's business is covered by sub-Section of Section 80-IA. As seen from sub-Section of Section 80-IA, the assessee can deduct the profits in any consecutive years out of the initial 15 years when he started his business or when he first met the conditions imposed in the provision.


IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: HONOURABLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ANTONY DOMINIC & HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU THURSDAY, 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/25TH KARTHIKA, 1939 ITA.No. 48 of 2015 AGAINST ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 157/COCH/2014 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 19-09-2014 APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT: KANAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS COMPANY PVT LTD., KDHP HOUSE, MUNNAR - 685 612, KERALA, PAN : AACCK5399 M. BY ADVS.SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ISAAC THOMAS SRI.NOBY THOMAS CYRIAC RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2), ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 018. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI (TAXES) R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-11-2017, COURT ON 16.11.2017 DELIVERED FOLLOWING: ITA.No. 48 of 2015 () :2: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE : TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2010 PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. ANNEXURE B : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 15.01.2014 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, KOCHI IN ITA 70/R-1/E/CIT(A)-II/2010-11. ANNEXURE C : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL ITA NO.157/2014 DATED 07.04.2014 FILED BY APPELLANT BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH. ANNEXURE D : CERTIFIED COPY OF IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.09.2014 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN IN ITA NO. 157/COCH/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. rv ANTONY DOMINIC, Ag. CJ & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. ------------------------------------------------- I. T. Appeal No.48 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this 16th day of November, 2017 JUDGMENT Dama Seshadri Naidu, J appellant-assessee is private limited company, engaged in business of growing, manufacturing, and selling tea and other produce. It is also engaged in business of distributing electricity taken from State-owned Kerala State Electricity Board. 2. assessee s predecessor, Tata Tea Limited, had not only owned plantation business but also generated hydel power from pre-independence days. Post-independence, when State took over power generation, company was allowed to buy electric power from Government in bulk, use it for its own purpose, and distribute balance power to residents of Munnar hill-station. So predecessor company had elaborate network of transmission lines. ITA No. 48/2015 :2: 3. Formed in March, 2005, assessee company took over power distribution network as well as tea plantations. 4. For assessment year 2008-09, assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.2,45,83,170/-. Later, it filed revised return declaring income of Rs.1,49,74,810/-. But assessing officer selected assessee company for scrutiny and determined total income at Rs.6,09,20,556/-, through Annexure proceedings, after making certain disallowances. 5. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II, Kochi, who allowed appeal in part through Annexure B order. Further aggrieved, assessee approached Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin bench ( Tribunal ). Rest of issues either held in assessee s favour or not pressed by assessee itself, only one issue remained for Tribunal to decide: Is Assessing Officer s disallowing deduction under Section 80-IA justified? ITA No. 48/2015 :3: Submissions: Assessee s: 6. Sri Joseph Markos, learned Senior Counsel for assessee, has submitted that assessee has fulfilled all eligibility criteria prescribed under Section 80-IA of Act. To elaborate, he has submitted that assessee substantially improved and increased distribution network spending huge amounts. According to him increase was beyond 50% of then existing establishment's value. 7. Sri Markos has drawn our attention to clarificatory circular issued by CBDT and also legislative purpose of Section 80-IA as spelt out in Finance Act, 2004. He contends that statutory provision enables assessee to claim certain deductions if investment has led to renovation and modernisation of transmission and distribution network. 8. To sum up, learned Senior Counsel has contended that one company taking over entire undertaking of another company hardly makes any difference to undertaking itself. According to him, tax benefits are undertaking-specific, and they do not run with undertaking s owner. So he urges us to answer questions of law ITA No. 48/2015 :4: in assessee s favour and restore deductions under Section 80-IA of Act. Revenue s: 9. Sri P. K. Ravindranatha Menon, learned Senior Counsel for Revenue, has contended that assessee s business is not new industrial undertaking. According to him, assessee has also miserably failed to establish that it has spent more than 50% of plant s book value on any renovation or modernisation. 10. learned Senior Counsel has strenuously contended that plant and machinery used by assessee had been used by its predecessor. So whatever assessee has is only used machinery or plant, and that cannot entail assessee to any tax concessions. According to Sri Menon, plant and machinery acquired by assessee company had been installed and continuously used by previous owner. 11. conditions imposed under section 80-IA(3) of Act are cumulative, contends Sri Menon. ITA No. 48/2015 :5: Substantial Question of Law: 12. Has Appellate Tribunal any material or evidence on record to justify its finding that assessee has not substantially renovated and modernised transmission and distribution lines within meaning of Section 80-IA? Discussion: 13. Indeed, facts are not in dispute. assessee took over going concern: tea estate with all its incidental businesses, too. power distribution system with network of transmission lines is part of that acquisition. assessee maintained that in 2007-08 it renovated and modernised transmission lines by investing huge amounts. So for assessment year 2008-09, it claimed tax benefits under section 80-IA of Act. Among other items, Assessing Officer disallowed deduction. Appellate Authority and Appellate Tribunal concurrently upheld Assessing Officer s findings on disallowance. 14. As on 01/04/2004, assessee s plant and machinery were valued at Rs.88,39,340/-. In financial year 2007-08, assessee invested Rs.50,30,952/-. Because of this investment, assessee asserts ITA No. 48/2015 :6: that transmission network has been renovated and modernised. Accordingly, it also justifies its claim for tax deductions under section 80-IA of Act. 15. Revenue frontally attacks assessee s claim for deduction on two grounds: (1) machinery on plant existing before alleged renovation or modernisation was used by assessee s predecessor; (2) conditions under Section 80-IA are cumulative, but assessee has failed to prove that it has fulfilled all those conditions. Statutory Scheme: 16. To be specific, assessee s claim for deduction hangs on scope and ambit of Section 80-IA of Act. It is, then, apposite for us to examine long-winded provision only to extent relevant for our purpose: Section 80 IA: 80-IA. Deductions in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprises engaged in infrastructure development, etc. [(1) Where gross total income of assessee includes any profits and gains derived by undertaking or enterprise from any business referred to in sub-section (4) (such business being hereinafter referred to as eligible business), there shall, in accordance with and subject to provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing total income of assessee, deduction of amount equal to ITA No. 48/2015 :7: hundred per cent of profits and gains derived from such business for ten consecutive assessment years.] (2) deduction specified in sub-section (1) may, at option of assessee, be claimed by him for any ten consecutive assessment years out of fifteen years beginning from year in which undertaking or enterprise develops and begins to operate any infrastructure facility or starts providing telecommunication service or develops industrial park [[or develops special economic zone] referred to in clause (iii) of sub-section(4)] or generates power or commences transmission or distribution of power [or undertakes substantial renovation and modernisation of existing transmission or distribution lines [or lays and begins to operate cross-country natural gas distribution network]]: [Provided that where assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops, operates and maintains any infrastructure facility referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of Explanation to clause (i) of sub-section (4), provisions of this sub-section shall have effect as if for words fifteen years , words twenty years had been substituted;] * * * (3) This section applies to [an [* * *] undertaking referred to in [clause (ii) or] [clause (iv) or clause (vi)] of sub-section (4)] which fulfils all following conditions, namely: (i) it is not formed by splitting up, or reconstruction, of business already in existence: Provided that this condition shall not apply in respect of [* * *] undertaking which is formed as result of re-establishment, re-construction or revival by assessee of business of any such [* * *] undertaking as is referred to in Section 33-B, in circumstances and within period specified in that section; (ii) it is not formed by transfer to new business of machinery or plant previously used for any purpose: [Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply in case of transfer, either in whole or in part, of machinery or plant previously used by State Electricity Board referred to in ITA No. 48/2015 :8: clause (7) of Section 2 of Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003), whether or not such transfer is in pursuance of splitting up or reconstruction or reorganisation of Board under Part XIII of that Act.] Explanation 1. For purposes of clause (ii), any machinery or plant which was used outside India by any person other than assessee shall not be regarded as machinery or plant previously used for any purpose, if following conditions are fulfilled, namely: (a) such machinery or plant was not, at any time previous to date of installation by assessee, used in India; (b) such machinery or plant is imported into India from any country outside India; and (c) no deduction on account of depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under provisions of this Act in computing total income of any person for any period prior to date of installation of machinery or plant by assessee. Explanation 2. Where in case of [* * *] undertaking, any machinery or plant or any part thereof previously used for any purpose is transferred to new business and total value of machinery or plant or part so transferred does not exceed twenty per cent of total value of machinery or plant used in business, then, for purposes of clause (ii) of this sub-section, condition specified therein shall be deemed to have been complied with. (4) This section applies to *** (iv) [* * *] undertaking which, (a) is set up in any part of India for generation or generation and distribution of power if it begins to generate power at any time during period beginning on 1st day of April, 1993 and ending on [the 31st day of March, 2010]; (b) starts transmission or distribution by laying network of new transmission or distribution lines at any time during period ITA No. 48/2015 :9: beginning on 1st day of April, 1999 and ending on [the 31st day of March, 2010]: Provided that deduction under this section to [* * *] undertaking under sub-clause (b) shall be allowed only in relation to profits derived from laying of such network of new lines for transmission or distribution. [(c) undertakes substantial renovation and modernisation of existing network of transmission or distribution lines at any time during period beginning on 1st day of April, 2004 and ending on [the 31st day of March, 2010]. Explanation. For purposes of this sub-clause, substantial renovation and modernisation means increase in plant and machinery in network of transmission or distribution lines by at least fifty per cent of book value of such plant and machinery as on 1st day of April, 2004.] (italics supplied) Provision in Plain English: (a) linguistic Aside: 17. Income Tax Act is one enactment that can shatter anybody s linguistic confidence or competence. Each provision inevitably, though runs into pages, superordinate, subordinate, and sub-subordinate clauses piling up in syntactic curlicues. With annual addition, provisions lose coherence and defy comprehension. Neither lawyer nor Judge can claim with comfort, if not with confidence, that he could comprehend provision at least on re- reading; taxpayer is surely lost in in maze of meandering phrases. ITA No. 48/2015 : 10 : It is therefore time for Revenue to host on their website plain English version of enactment only suggestion, however. 18. Even native speakers of language notably USA and UK have re-drafted, and have been re-drafting, bulk of their legislation in plain language. In USA, Federal and State Governments apart, Uniform Law Commission, non-profit organisation of volunteers promoting uniformity of laws throughout United States , has drafted in legal-linguistic experts like Bryan Garner and Joseph Kimble for this purpose. (b) Paraphrased Provision: Section 80-IA: (1) assessee can deduct his entire profits for ten consecutive assessment years if his profits are from business referred to in sub-section (4) of this section. But deduction is subject to limitations in this provision. (2) assessee can deduct profits in any ten consecutive years out of fifteen years. fifteen-year period begins when assessee s establishment involves in any of these activities: (a) develop and operate any infrastructure facility, (b) start telecommunication service, (c) develop industrial park, (d) develop special economic zone [referred to in clause (iii) of sub- section(4)], (e) generate, transmit, or distribute power, (f) substantially renovate or modernise existing transmission or distribution lines, or (g) lay and operate cross-country natural gas distribution network. ITA No. 48/2015 : 11 : But fifteen-year period will be extended by five more years if assessee develops; or operatives and maintains; or develops, operates, and maintains any infrastructure facility referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of Explanation to clause (i) of sub-section (4). (3) This section applies to undertakings referred to in clause (ii) or clause (iv) or clause (vi) of sub-section (4)] fulfilling all these conditions: (i) undertaking is not formed by splitting up or by reconstructing existing business: But this condition will not apply to undertaking if assessee re-establishes, re-constructs, revives business as referred to in Section 33-B and in circumstances and within period specified in that section; (ii) it is not formed by transferring to new business any machinery or plant used earlier for any purpose: But this sub-section will not affect transfer, either in whole or in part, of machinery or plant used by State Electricity Board referred to in clause (7) of Section 2 of Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003). Even if transfer is by splitting up or by reconstructing, or by reorganizing Board under Part XIII of that Act. Explanation 1. restriction under clause (ii) will not apply to machinery or plant used abroad by any other person than assessee, if these conditions are fulfilled: (a) machinery or plant was not used in India before its installation by assessee; (b) machinery or plant is imported into India; and (c) no depreciation is allowed or allowable under this Act on machinery or plant in computing total income of any person for any period before assessee installed machinery or plant. Explanation 2. restriction under clause (ii) will not apply if used machinery transferred to assessee s new business does ITA No. 48/2015 : 12 : not exceed twenty per cent of total value of machinery or plant used in new business. (4) This section applies to (i) any enterprise carrying on business of (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or (iii) developing, operating, and maintaining any infrastructure facility fulfilling these conditions: (a) it is owned by company registered in India, by consortium of such companies, by authority, board, corporation, or any other body established under any Central or State Act; (b) it has contracted with Central Government, or State Government, or local authority, or any other statutory body for (i) developing; (ii) operating and maintaining; or (iii) developing, operating, and maintaining new infrastructure facility; (c) it operates and maintains infrastructure facility from any day after 1st day of April 1995: ... (iv) if undertaking in India (a) generates or generates and distributes power at any time between 1st April 1993 and 31st March 2010; (b) transmits and distributes by laying network of new transmission or distribution lines between 1st April 1999 and 31st March 2010: But assessee can deduct profits under sub-clause (b) only if they are derived from network of new transmission or distribution lines. (c) substantially renovates or modernizes existing network of transmission or distribution lines between 1st April 2004 and 31st March 2010. Explanation. For sub-clause (c), renovation or modernization must have increased at least by fifty per cent book value of plant and machinery as it stood on 1st April 2004. ITA No. 48/2015 : 13 : Analysis: Are Conditions Cumulative? 19. Section 80-IA of Act, to begin with, is beneficial provision, carving out exception from rigors of tax payment. assessee can deduct his total profits for ten consecutive assessment years if it earns those profits from any of those businesses enumerated under sub-Section (4) of provision. Indeed, deduction is subject to certain limitations. Undoubtedly, assessee's business is covered by sub-Section (4) of Section 80-IA. As seen from sub-Section (2) of Section 80-IA, assessee can deduct profits in any consecutive years out of initial 15 years when he started his business or when he first met conditions imposed in provision. 20. We may first deal with pertinent issue: enterprise may (i) develop, or (ii) operate and maintain, or (iii) develop, operate, and maintain any infrastructural facility. It brooks no contradiction if we hold that all these three activities are disjoint. Now, we will see clause (iv) of sub-section (4). It mandates that undertaking in India may (a) generate or generate and distribute power at any time between 1.4.1993 and 31.3.2010; (b) transmit and distribute by laying network of new ITA No. 48/2015 : 14 : transmission or distribution lines between above-mentioned period; or (c) substantially renovate or modernize existing network of transmission or distribution lines between same period. 21. Revenue, indeed, has contended that these three contingencies are cumulative. We are afraid they are not. clauses (a), (b), and (c) are disjointed and, in fact, unconnected. Clauses (b) and (c), especially, cannot go together. Under clause (b) network of new transmission or distribution lines must be laid, whereas under clause (c), they must be renovated or modernized. Laying down new network of transmission lines under clause (b) and simultaneously renovating them under clause (c) exposes temporal impossibility and linguistic incongruity. 22. First, temporally, we can only renovate what has already been in use; second, linguistically, we cannot renovate what is new. So legislative intent is unmistakable, and conditions are disjoint and independent. assessee s fulfilling any one of them will suffice. And assessee here did fulfil clause (c). 23. Now, we may, as well examine whether conditions under sub-Section (4)(i) are cumulative. Clause (a) mandates that company ITA No. 48/2015 : 15 : must have been registered in India under any Central or State Act. It should contract with Central Government, or State Government, or any other statutory authority to develop, or operate and maintain or, develop, operate and maintain new infrastructure facility. Under clause (c), operating and maintaining infrastructure facility must have commenced after 1st April, 1995. It is not disputed that all these three activities are cumulative and assessee fulfils them all. Has Machinery Been Used? 24. Indeed, learned Senior Counsel for Revenue has emphasized that much of machinery in assessee's establishment has already been used by another establishment. 25. Section 80IA, evidently, applies to undertaking referred to in clause (ii) or clause (iv) or clause (vi) of sub-section (4) if it fulfils enumerated conditions. We have already held that assessee s undertaking falls in clause (iv) of sub-section (4). 26. As per conditions stipulated, assessee ought not to have formed undertaking by splitting up or reconstructing existing business. Here there is neither splitting up nor reconstructing; nor is it Revenue s case, either. Equally mandatory is other ITA No. 48/2015 : 16 : condition that assessee has not formed undertaking (ii) by transferring to new business any machinery or plant used earlier for any purpose. Revenue, true, latches on to it. We will see whether it can sustain this plea: assessee formed undertaking by transferring used machinery or plant to new business. 27. Of course, restriction under clause (ii) will not apply to machinery or plant used abroad by any other person than assessee, as stated in Explanation I. But it does not apply to this case; nor does Explanation 2, which permits assessee s new business to use less than 20% of used machinery. Statutory Purpose: 28. It is well to remember that deduction under Section 80-IA was introduced only through Finance (No.2) Act, 2004; Act spells out that it is to encourage investment in existing undertakings. CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2005, dated 15th July, 2005, clarifies legislative intention: ''[R]ecognising need to encourage investment in renovation and modernization of transmission and distribution network, benefit under section has been extended to undertakings which undertake substantial renovation and modernization of existing network of transmission or distribution lines during ITA No. 48/2015 : 17 : period beginning on 01-04-2004 and ending on 31-3-2006. 'Substantial renovation and modernisation' means 50 per cent increase in book value of plant and machinery in network of transmission or distribution lines, as on 01-04-2004''. (Italics supplied) 29. From above extract, we can gather that Section 80-IA has salutatory purpose of encouraging investment in renovation and modernization of transmission and distribution network. Whose Benefit Does Provision Exist For? 30. We must acknowledge that deduction under section 80-IA is profit-linked incentive, for very Chapter VI-A provides for incentives of tax deductions. 1961 Act broadly provides for two types of tax incentives: (a) investment linked incentives; (b) profit linked incentives. So, according to Supreme Court in Liberty India v. CIT,1 when Section 80-IA/80-IB refers to profits derived from eligible business, it is not ownership of that business which attracts incentives. What merits incentives under Section 80-IA/80-IB is generation of profits (operational profits). 1[] 183 TAXMAN 349 (SC) ITA No. 48/2015 : 18 : 31. Further, if we look at scheme of Section 80-IA(2), it does not speak about business of assessee but of "undertaking" or "enterprise". Then, undertaking or enterprise alone matters for Revenue to decide eligibility. Significantly, section 80-IA (2), charging provision, does not refer to business as such. Analogous Provision and Its Interpretation: 32. Section 84 since repealed is in pari materia.2 Interpreting this provision, CBDT issued clarificatory note, dt. 13/12/1963: Board agree that benefit of section 84 of IT Act, 1961, attaches to undertaking and not to owner thereof. successor may have benefit for unexpired period of five years provided undertaking is taken over as running concern. Has Assessee s Undertaking Fulfilled Eligibility Criteria? 2(1)[] Section 84. Income of newly established industrial undertakings or hotels. (1) Save as otherwise hereinafter provided, income tax shall not be payable by assessee on so much of profits and gains derived from any industrial undertaking or business of hotel or from any ship, to which this section applies, as does not exceed six per cent. per annum on capital employed in such undertaking or business or ship, computed in prescribed manner. (2) This section applies to any industrial undertaking which fulfils all following conditions namely: (i) it is not formed by splitting up, or reconstruction, of business already in existence; (ii) it is not formed by transfer to new business of building, machinery or plant previously used for any purpose; ITA No. 48/2015 : 19 : 33. Repetitive it may be, assessee acquired in March, 2005 certain tea estates at Munnar, as going concern. This acquisition included erstwhile Devikulam Estate from Tata Tea Limited. plant and machinery thus acquired included electric power distribution network transmission lines. 34. assessee produced audited certificate that written down value of plant and machinery as on 01/04/2004 was Rs. 88,39,340/-. It has claimed that it spent for assessment year 2008-09 Rs.50.31 Lakh to renovate and modernize its transmission network. So, amount spent is over 50% of then existing establishment's book value. Indeed, undertaking squarely falls under Section 80-1A(4)(iv) (c) of Act. renovation or modernization, admittedly, took place between 01.04.2004 and 31.03.2011. 35. To be specific, assessee claims that undertaking s renovation or modernization has brought about substantial improvement in 'line loss.' Substantial renovation and modernization has been done by replacement of High Tension distribution lines and installation of new CT/PT units. ITA No. 48/2015 : 20 : Conclusion: 36. In above circumstances, Assessing Officer s disallowing Rs.58,91,000/- under section 80-IA of Act, as affirmed by Appellate Authority and Tribunal, cannot be sustained. So, we answer question of law in assessee s favour. As corollary, we set aside Tribunal s impugned order, dated 19.09.2014, and allow Appeal. No order on costs. ANTONY DOMINIC, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE. rv Kanan Devan Hills Plantations Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 1(2), Kochi
Report Error