2019 (8) TMI 708 - HC - Income Tax

Court denies deduction under Section 80IB (7)(a) of Income Tax Act for saloon business not integral to hotel operations.

Bir Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr.

The court ruled in favor of the department, denying the appellant eligibility for the deduction under Section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The court ... Deduction u/s 80IB (7)(a) - Hotel business - income from Saloon - income from the saloon section by the appellant-hotel - Whether after holding the saloon activity as desirbale and CIT (A) holding it to be an integral part of the Hotel business which finding holds goods, the Tribunal is legally justified in holding that the receipts from saloon business are not derived from the hotel business? - HELD THAT:- The authorities below have examined the contract or franchisee agreement of the assessee with M/s. HLL, which has a separate and distinct identity from the hotel business of the appellant. The authorities below have also examined the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Sterling Foods [ 1999 (4) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT ] wherein the Apex Court has inter alia held that the word 'derived from' restricts the qualifying profits to the profits directly arising from the particular activity and not the receipts unrelated to the eligible business. There must be, for the application of the word 'derived from', a direct nexus between profits and gains and the industrial undertakings. The authorities below therefore, came to the conclusion that because the appellant was not fulfilling any of the requisite conditions and the income was not directly derived from the business and had no direct nexus, the benefit of section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rightly denied. As such the assessee clearly was not eligible for it. Thus as the assessee failed to establish that the saloon business was the part and parcel of the core activity of the hotel business. - Decided in favour of the department and against the assessee. Issues Involved:- Interpretation of Section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act- Eligibility of deduction for income from saloon section in a hotel business- Determining if the saloon business is an integral part of the hotel businessInterpretation of Section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act:The judgment revolves around the interpretation of Section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act, which provides for a deduction in the case of any hotel. The section specifies the conditions under which a hotel can claim a deduction on profits and gains derived from the business. The court analyzed the provisions of this section in detail to determine the eligibility of the appellant for the deduction.Eligibility of Deduction for Income from Saloon Section:The primary issue in the case was whether the income derived from the saloon section of a hotel could be considered for the deduction under Section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant argued that the saloon section should be treated as an integral part of the hotel business, similar to the restaurant or bar section. However, the department contended that there must be a direct nexus between the receipts from the saloon business and the core activities of the hotel to qualify for the deduction.Determining if the Saloon Business is Integral to the Hotel Business:The court examined the facts of the case to determine whether the saloon business was indeed an integral part of the hotel business. It considered the timeline of the establishment of the hotel and the subsequent addition of the saloon section through a franchise agreement. The court analyzed whether the saloon activities were directly connected to the core business activities of the hotel and whether the receipts from the saloon section could be considered as derived from the hotel business.The court noted that the saloon section started functioning after the hotel was already operational and that there was no direct nexus between the saloon activities and the core business of the hotel. It was observed that the customers utilizing the saloon services included outsiders, indicating that the saloon business was not solely catering to the hotel guests. The court also compared the nature of services provided by the saloon with the essential services of the hotel, such as food and refreshments, to determine the integration of the saloon business with the hotel activities.In conclusion, the court held that the appellant failed to establish that the saloon business was an integral part of the core activity of the hotel business. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the department, denying the appellant the eligibility for the deduction under Section 80IB (7)(a) of the Income Tax Act. As a result, the appeal was dismissed.