2022 (11) TMI 25

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. Whether the Tribunal was right in classifying Bangalore as a non-urban area for the purposes of Section 54G when it was previously categorized as an urban area until 1990? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in finding that an urban area such as Bangalore could be classified as a non-urban area for the purpose of Section 54G from 1990 and then once again be classified as an urban area from 27-04-2006? " 2. Brief facts of the case are, assessee's Manufacturing unit in Bommasandra Industrial Area, was originally allotted by KIADB on 01.01.1985 in the name of Proprietor of M/s. Sun Industries. The Proprietary firm was changed into a Private Limited Company in the name and style of M/s. Fabsun Engineering Pvt. Ltd., the assessee here....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ated the demand vide order dated 24.12.2012. The CIT(A) vide order dated 30.08.2013 dismissed appeal No.113/ITO-11(2)/A-I/12-13. The ITAT also dismissed the appeal vide impugned order dated 27.02.2015 in Appeal No.1396/Bang/2013. 5. Shri. Suryanarayana, learned Senior Advocate for the assessee submitted that the ITAT has dismissed the appeal on the ground that explanation to Section 54G(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) expressly provides that having regard to the population, concentration of Industries and the need for proper planning of area, the Central Government declares an area to be an urban area. The CBDT (Central Board of Direct Taxes) has issued Notification dated 27.04.2006 for the purpose of exemption und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records. 11. Undisputed facts of the case are: * assessee has sold the property situated in Bengaluru on 19.03.1997; * CBDT has issued Notification under Section 280Y(d) on 22.09.1967 declaring Bangalore Corporation as urban area. The ITAT has noticed this aspect in para 14 of its order, but held that the said Notification is applicable for Tax Credit Certificates and cannot be held applicable to exemption under Section 54G of the Act; * The benefit under Section 54G has been denied by the Revenue on the premise that this Court had held that CBDT Notification dated 27.04.2006 issued under Sub-Section (1) of Section 54G had no retrospective effect. 12. The ITAT's order is ....