Court overturns rejection of industrial park approval application under Industrial Park Scheme, 2008

The court set aside the order rejecting the petitioner's application for industrial park approval under the Industrial Park Scheme, 2008. The petitioner claimed completion before 31.3.2011, supported by documents. However, CBDT found discrepancies and concluded completion in 2013. The court required a local authority completion certificate, accepting GIDC's certification as substantial compliance. The petitioner was given until 30.9.2016 to produce GIDC's certificate. If provided, CBDT must approve the application for deductions under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act and issue notification within three months. Petition allowed and disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to the rejection of the petitioner's application for approval and notification of its industrial park under the Industrial Park Scheme, 2008.
2. Analysis of evidence regarding the completion of the industrial park before the specified date.
3. Requirement of a completion certificate from a local authority.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Challenge to the Rejection of the Application:
The petitioner challenged the CBDT's order dated 5.11.2014, which rejected the petitioner's application for approval and notification of its industrial park under the Industrial Park Scheme, 2008. The petitioner argued that the project was completed before the extended deadline of 31.3.2011, making it eligible for deductions under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. Analysis of Evidence Regarding Completion:
The petitioner provided various documents to support the claim that the industrial park was completed before 31.3.2011. These included:
- A completion report dated 5.9.2010 from MARS Planning & Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd.
- A project completion certificate dated 8.4.2013 from the Industries Commissioner, Government of Gujarat.
- Certificates and letters issued by the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (AUDA).

CBDT rejected these documents, noting:
- The work completion certificate from AUDA did not specify a completion date and was requested almost a year after the claimed completion date.
- The occupancy certificate dated 17.6.2010 from AUDA was only for one unit and did not cover all 182 units.
- The completion report from MARS Planning & Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. indicated that work was still pending as of 16.6.2010.
- The project completion certificate from the Industries Commissioner was issued in response to a request made two years after the claimed completion date.

CBDT concluded that the project was actually completed in 2013, not before 31.3.2011 as claimed.

3. Requirement of a Completion Certificate from a Local Authority:
CBDT insisted on a completion certificate from a local authority, which the petitioner did not provide. The court noted that the Industrial Park Scheme required a certificate from a local authority but did not specify that it had to be AUDA. The court referred to the case of Ganesh Housing Corporation Ltd. v. Padam Singh, where it was held that the completion of the project, not the establishment of industrial units, was the requirement.

The court observed that MARS Planning & Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. was appointed by GIDC to certify the quality and completion of the project for state subsidy. This certification, along with the approval of the State Level Committee and the grant of subsidy, constituted substantial compliance with the requirement.

Conclusion:
The court set aside the impugned order dated 5.11.2014, allowing the petitioner to produce a completion certificate from GIDC by 30.9.2016. If such a certificate is provided, CBDT is directed to approve the petitioner's application for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act and issue the necessary notification within three months. The petition was allowed and disposed of accordingly.

---