TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1623
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Officer ('Ld. AO') in re-classifying the income from car parking amounting to INR 3,31,36,739. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in reclassifying the income from sale of food and beverages amounting to INR 7,91,290. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in reclassifying the interest income on fixed deposits amounting to INR 43,64,877 and other income amounting to INR 71,600. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO holding that the amount pertaining to car parking of INR 3,31,36,739 is not liable for deduction under Section 80-IAB of the Act despite the assessee being an eligible unit. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO holding that the amount pertaining to food and beverages of INR 7,91,290 is not liable for deduction under Section 80-IAB of the Act despite the assessee being an eligible unit. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome from maintenance services - Rs 13,41,33,530/- Rs 44,52,44,762/- (c) Interest from car parking - Rs 3,31,36,739/- (d) Sale of food and beverages - Rs 7,91,290/- (e) Interest income from fixed deposits - Rs 43,64,877/- (f) Other income - Rs 71,600/- Rs 3,83,64,506/- Total - Rs 48,36,09,268/- 5. The ld. AO was of the opinion that the income referred to in items (c ), (d), (e) and (f) would have to be construed as income from other sources not eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act as the same cannot be construed as income earned from business of developing and operating the SEZ. The ld AO observed that business of the assessee is to develop SEZ in IT / ITeS sector and lease out the premises for rent and maintaining the said SEZ, which implies that only lease rentals for the premises and the maintenance charges can be considered as income from business. Car Parking Rentals are received from even the visitors who come to the offices of the occupants thereof and hence such income cannot be considered as from SEZ activities. Similarly, the interest income on fixed deposits, other income and sale of food and beverages....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....towards section 80-IAB towards car parking rental in favour of the assessee. We find that the above instances are assessee's group cases and cover the issue in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, we hold that assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 80-IAB towards car parking income, income from health club, income from food court and interest income. This issue is decided in favour of the assessee." 8. Further we find that following are the permitted services by Department of Commerce (SEZ Section), Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India vide approval letter dated 10.3.2008 :- "M/s Unitech Realty Projects Limited, Gurgaon, Haryana Authorized Operations in the Processing Area S. No. ACTIVITY QUANTUM APPROVED 1 Power (including Power back up facility) 30 MW 2 Parking including multi-level car parking (automated or manual) 3 Recreational facilities including club house, indoor or outdoor games Gym etc. 1000 sq. m. 4 Food services including, cafeteria, food court(s) restaurants, coffee shops, canteens and catering facilities 2000 sq m. 5 Employees welfare facilities like crèche, medical center and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quent judgment dated 30-4-2014 in ITA No. 76 & 78/2012 in the case of CIT v. Information Technology Park Ltd., [2014] 46 taxmann.com 239 (Karnataka) the Karnataka High Court has reaffirmed its earlier views. It has held that, since the assessee-company was engaged in the business of developing, operating and maintaining an Industrial Park and providing infrastructure facilities to different companies as its business, the lease rent received by the assessee from letting out buildings along with other amenities in a software technology park would be chargeable to tax under the head "Income from Business" and not under the head "Income from House Property". The judgment has been accepted by the Board. 3. In view of the above, it is now a settled position that in the case of an undertaking which develops, develops and operates or maintains and operates an industrial park/SEZ notified in accordance with the scheme framed and notified by the Government, the income from letting out of premises/developed space along with other facilities in an industrial park/SEZ is to be charged to tax under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business'. 4. Accordingly, henceforth, ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case of CIT vs Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd reported in 243 ITR 2(SC) ; CIT vs Bokaro Steel Ltd reported in 236 ITR 315 (SC). We find that but for the issuance of bank guarantee to the Government of India, the assessee could not have completed the first step of setting up of business of developing and operating the SEZ without the business itself would not have commenced. Hence the first degree nexus of placing fixed deposits for securing bank guarantees qua the business of the assessee stands clearly established. Accordingly, the interest income earned thereon would be eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act. This view is further fortified by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Meghalaya Steel Ltd reported in 383 ITR 217 (SC). Hence we hold that interest income on fixed deposits would be eligible for deduction u/s 80IAB of the Act in the instant case. 13. However, with regard to other non-operating income of Rs 71,600/- is concerned, the assessee had not furnished any details regarding the same proving the business nexus of such receipt. No arguments were even advanced before us regarding the same proving the nature of receipt. Hence we hol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dinate bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Candor Kolkata One Hi-Tech Structures Pvt Ltd vs ACIT in ITA No. 6937/Del/2018 for Asst Year 2013-14 dated 22.11.2023, wherein it was held as under:- "4. Apropos brokerage expenses: The AO disallowed the claim of brokerage paid by the assessee amounting to Rs. 1,58,22,131/- for enabling it to lease part of the SEZ premises to three parties. Assessee provided names and addresses of the parties along with invoices. However, AO was not satisfied. He wanted the copy of agreement or documentary evidence in support of the claim for payment of brokerage and services rendered by the parties. In absence of the same, AO disallowed the claim. Upon assessee's appeal, Id. CIT (A) referring to its earlier order, confirmed the same. 5. Against the above order, assessee has filed appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. 6. Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that in assessee's group concern, on similar facts and circumstances, ITAT had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 7. Per contra, Id. DR for the Revenue did not dispute this proposition. 8. We note that ITAT in ....