2019 (7) TMI 234 - HC - Income Tax

High Court invalidates case reopening, affirms 100% deduction entitlement for substantial manufacturing unit expansion.

The High Court ruled that the reopening of the case under Section 147 was invalid as the second question regarding the allowance of 100% deduction under ... Deduction u/s 80IC - claim admissible for five years - whether assessee can start claiming the exemption at the same rate of 100% beyond the period of five years on the ground that the assessee has now carried out substantial expansion in its manufacturing unit? - HELD THAT:- As decided in M/S. AARHAM SOFTRONICS [2019 (2) TMI 1285 - SUPREME COURT] as defined in clause (ix) of sub-section (8) of Section 80-IC by such an undertaking or enterprise, within the aforesaid period of 10 years, the said previous year in which the substantial expansion is undertaken would become 'initial assessment year', and from that assessment year the assessee shall been entitled to 100% deductions of the profits and gains. Such deduction, however, would be for a total period of 10 years, as provided in sub-section (6). For example, if the expansion is carried out immediately, on the completion of first five years, the assessee would be entitled to 100% deduction again for the next five years. On the other hand, if substantial expansion is undertaken, say, in 8th year by an assessee such an assessee would be entitled to 100% deduction for the first five years, deduction @ 25% of the profits and gains for the next two years and @ 100% again from 8th year as this year becomes 'initial assessment year' once again. However, this 100% deduction would be for remaining three years, i.e., 8th, 9th and 10th assessment years. - Decided against the Revenue Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - HELD THAT:- Once the second question of law is answered against the Revenue, it would not be a case for reopening of assessment under Section 147. Therefore, the first question of law is also answered against the Revenue Issues:1. Validity of reopening the case under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Allowance of 100% deduction under Section 80IC despite quashing of proceedings under Section 147.Analysis:Issue 1: Validity of Reopening the Case under Section 147:The High Court addressed the first substantial question of law raised by the Revenue, which questioned the validity of reopening the case under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had considered the intimation notice under Section 143(1)(a) as an assessment, leading to the dispute. The Court noted that once the second question of law, regarding the allowance of 100% deduction under Section 80IC, was answered against the Revenue, there would be no basis for reopening the assessment under Section 147. Consequently, the Court ruled that the reopening of the case under Section 147 was invalid, and thus, the first question of law was answered against the Revenue.Issue 2: Allowance of 100% Deduction under Section 80IC:The second substantial question of law revolved around the allowance of 100% deduction under Section 80IC despite the quashing of proceedings under Section 147. The Supreme Court, in a related case, had considered whether an assessee could claim the exemption at the same rate of 100% beyond the initial five-year period due to substantial expansion in the manufacturing unit. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in another case and concluded that an enterprise carrying out substantial expansion within the specified period would be entitled to 100% deductions for ten years, starting from the year of substantial expansion. The Court explained the implications of substantial expansion on the entitlement to deductions, emphasizing the specific conditions under Section 80IC. Consequently, the Court answered the second question of law in favor of the assessee, allowing the 100% deduction under Section 80IC despite the quashing of proceedings under Section 147.In summary, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh addressed the issues of reopening the case under Section 147 and the allowance of 100% deduction under Section 80IC. The Court ruled that the reopening of the case was invalid due to the resolution of the second question in favor of the assessee, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. Additionally, the Court clarified the entitlement to deductions under Section 80IC based on substantial expansion, as determined by the Supreme Court in a related case.