ThisBesides the earlier decision, the court observed that the provision is not retrospective and allowed the appeal directed quashing of the earlier order.
The appeal filed by the Revenue was allowed based on the earlier decision of this Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
I.T.T.A. No.417 of 2011
Date:17.11.2011
Between:
Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur
… Appellant
AND
Agricultural Market Committee, Krosuru
… Respondent
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
I.T.T.A. No.417 of 2011
JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao)
This appeal is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). By the impugned order the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench took the view that Section 10(26AAB) of the Act is retrospective, and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.
Section 10(26AAB) of the Act exempts income of Agricultural Market Committees (AMCs) from the levy of income tax under the Act. It was inserted by the Finance Act, 2008 with effect from 01.4.2009. The question whether the said provision is retrospective in operation has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (VVSR, J) is a member, in Commissioner of Income Tax v Agricultural Market Committee, Tanuk u[1] . It was held therein that Section 10(26AAB) of the Act is prospective in operation. The decision therein – both the Counsel do not dispute – squarely covers the issue that is raised in this appeal.
Following the decision in Agricultural Market Committee, Tanuku, this appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs. The advocate fee is Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only).
_______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J)
_____________________ (SANJAY KUMAR, J)
17.11.2011
vs
[1] (2011) 337 ITR 299 (AP)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 10(26AAB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is retrospective in operation.
Whether the earlier holding in Commissioner of Income Tax v Agricultural Market Committee, Tanuku covers the instant appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Commissioner of Income Tax v Agricultural Market Committee, TanukuRelied on¶15
(2011) 337 ITR 299 (AP)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur
Agricultural Market Committee, Krosuru
V.V.S. Rao
Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
