2011 (2) TMI 1251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).   The Facts   2. The Petitioner is an authority created under UP Industrial Area Development Act, 1976 (the Industrial-Area Act). The major portion of its area is in district Gautam Budh Nagar, though a small part of other districts are also included in it.   3. The Income Tax Department (the Department) issued notices dated 29.8.2005 and 31.8.2005 requiring,   The Petitioner to file its return for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-5 (under section 142 of the Act);   The bankers of the Petitioner to submit the details of its tern deposits (under section 131 of the Act);   The bakers of the Petitioner to deduct the tax at source (under section 194A of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s have elapsed. The question whether the petitioner is local authority under section 10(20) of the Act is a question of law, no facts are necessary. In view of this instead of dismissing the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy, we proceed to decide it on merits.   2nd Point: Petitioner Is Not A Local Authority   8. The counsel for the petitioner places reliance on Saij Gram Panchyat vs State of Gujrat and others reported in (1999) 2 SCC 366 (the Saji-Panchayat case) and submits that:   Article 243P(e) and Article 243Q of the Constitution define three kinds of Municipalities namely Nagar Panchayat, Municipal Council, and Municipal Corporation. An industrial township is a fourth kind of local body that is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of its members are always elected by local residents. All the members of the Petitioner are nominated and not even one is elected. It is neither an institution of local self government nor a municipality.   The Petitioner is not a 'local authority' within the meaning of Section 10(20) of the Act and its income is not exempt.   10. The submissions raised by the counsel for the parties are interesting and we would have considered them in detail but refrain from doing so due to the following two decisions of the Supreme Court:   (i) Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Narela, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and another; (2008) 9 SCC 434 (the APM case);   (ii) Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authori....