Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-2, Mumbai v. Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd - 2019-LL-0827-27

Citation	2019-LL-0827-27
Appellant Name	Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-2, Mumbai
Respondent Name	Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	27/08/2019
Assessment Year	2010-11
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	admissibility of deduction • infrastructure facility
Bot Summary:	Mr.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the Revenue urges the following question of law for our consideration : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IA 2 18 ITXA 952 - 2017.doc of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though activities undertaken by the assessee do not fall within Clause of the Explanation to section 80IA(4) defining the term Infrastructure facility 3. It is an agreed position between the parties that the issue herein stands concluded against the Revenue and in favour of the Respondent-assessee by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Thane v. Continental Warehousing Corporation Ltd. - 2015 68 taxmann.com 78 and by Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1 v. Container Corporation of India Ltd. - 2018 404 ITR 397. In the above view the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law.

IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 952 OF 2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Mumbai .. Appellant Vs Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.Suresh Kumar, for Appellant. Mr.Madhur Agarwal & Ms.Khushboo Shah i/b AKR Advisors LLP, for Respondent. CORAM : M.S.SANKLECHA & NITIN JAMDAR, JJ. Date : 27 August, 2019. P.C. : This Appeal under section 260-A of Income Tax Act 1961(the Act ), challenges order dated 4 August 2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai ( Tribunal ). This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Mr.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for Revenue urges following question of law for our consideration : Whether, on facts and in circumstances of case, and in law Tribunal was right in holding that assessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IA 2 18 ITXA 952 - 2017.doc of Income Tax Act, 1961 even though activities undertaken by assessee do not fall within Clause (d) of Explanation to section 80IA(4) defining term Infrastructure facility? 3. It is agreed position between parties that issue herein stands concluded against Revenue and in favour of Respondent-assessee by decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Thane v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. - [2015] 68 taxmann.com 78 (Bombay) and by Apex Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1 v. Container Corporation of India Ltd. - [2018] 404 ITR 397. 4. In above view question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus not entertained. 5. Appeal dismissed. (NITIN JAMDAR, J.) (M.S.SANKLECHA, J.) Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-2, Mumbai v. Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd

Metadata

Judgment