The ITO, Ward-4, Rajahmundry v. M/s Agricultural Market Committee, Rajahmundry

ITA 222/VIZ/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 22225314 RSA 2010
Bench Visakhapatnam
Appeal Number ITA 222/VIZ/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-4, Rajahmundry
Respondent M/s Agricultural Market Committee, Rajahmundry
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 22-07-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 29-03-2010
Judgment Text
PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM B EFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.221 TO 223/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05 TO 2006-07 ITO WARD-4 VS. AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE RAJAHMUNDRY RAJAHMUNDRY (PAN NO.AACTA 0347 R) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUBRATA SARKAR CIT-DR RESPONDENTS BY: SHRI G.V.N. HARI ORDER PER BENCH: - THE APPEALS FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE AR E DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF THE LD CIT (A) RAJAHMUNDRY PASSED AGAINST THE QUANTUM ASSESSMENTS RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2006-07. 2. THE SOLITARY ISSUE URGED IN THIS APPEAL IS WHETH ER THE LD CIT (A) IS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE SECTION 10(26AAB) IS RETROACTIVE I N OPERATION AND THEREBY THE INCOME OF THESE ASSESSEES ARE EXEMPT U/S 10(26AAB) OF THE ACT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RECORD. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE WE EXTRACT THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT (A). 6. I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT. THE ISS UE FOR CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE INSERTION OF SECTION 1 0(26AAB) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WAS A DECLARATIVE ACT TO R EMOVE DOUBTS EXISTING WITH REGARD TO THE EFFECT OF PRE-EX ISTING STATUE AND HENCE RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION. IN THE DECISIO N RELIED UPON BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT O F THE HON'BLE PAGE 2 OF 3 JURISDICTIONAL INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IT HA S BEEN CONCLUDED AT PARA (14) OF THE ORDER AS UNDER:- SINCE WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 10(26AAB) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ARE INTENDED TO BE RETROACTIVE IN OPERATION HAVING BEEN INSERTED IN T HE STATUTE BOOK WITH A VIEW TO CLARIFY THE POSITION OF AMCS EV EN UNDER THE PRE-EXISTING STATUTE AND THE FINANCE MINISTER HAVIN G SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED WHILE REPLYING TO THE DEBATE IN THE LOK SABHA THAT THERE IS NO INTENTION TO TAX AMCS THE ENTIRE FEE/I NCOME COLLECTED/RECEIVED HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS EXEMPT F ROM THE LEVY OF TAX IN WHICH EVEN THE DECISION ON THE ANCILLARY ISSUE IS OF ACADEMIC IMPORTANCE AND THUS NEED NOT BE GONE INTO . 6.1 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HON' BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM IT IS HELD TH AT THE INSERTION OF SUB-CLAUSE (26AAB) TO SECTION 10 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 IS ESSENTIALLY INTENDED TO DO AWAY WITH T HE DOUBTS AND ALSO TO DECLARE THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE OF NOT TAXING THE INCOME OF AMCS CONSTITUTED UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TI ME BEING IN FORCE FOR THE PURPOSES OF REGULATING THE MARKETING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AND HENCE IT HAS TO BE TREATED AS RETROACTI VE IN OPERATION AND APPLICABLE EVEN FOR THE PRIOR YEARS. 4. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION RENDERED BY THIS BENCH ON THE INSTANT ISSUE. IN A BATCH OF APPEALS I.E. IN I.T.A.NO.90/VIZAG/2007 AND BATCH I.T.A.T. VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VIDE ORDER DT.28.11.2008 HELD THAT THE INCOME OF THE AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEES IS EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10(26AAB) OF THE ACT. THE DECISION RENDERED IN THA T CASE IS EXTRACTED BELOW: HAVING REGARD TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE FIRM VIEW THAT THE INSERTION OF SUB-CLAUSE (26AAB) TO SECTION 10 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT IS ESSENTIALLY INTENDED TO DECLARE THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE OF NOT TAXING THE INCO ME OF AMCS CONSTITUTED UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FOR CE FOR THE PURPOSES OF REGULATING THE MARKETING OF AGRICULTURA L PRODUCE AND HENCE IT HAS TO BE TREATED AS RETROACTIVE IN OP ERATION AND APPLICABLE EVEN FOR THE PRIOR YEARS WE ORDER ACCOR DINGLY. PAGE 3 OF 3 5. SINCE THE LD CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISIO N RENDERED BY THIS BENCH WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH HIS ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVE NUE ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/07/2010. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PVV/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATE: 22 ND JULY 2010 COPY TO 1. ITO WARD-4 RAJAHMUNDRY 2. THE AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE RAJAHMUNDRY 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) RAJAHMUNDR Y 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RAJAHMUNDRY 5. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE I.T.A.T. VISA KHAPATNAM 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM