Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority V. Union of India & Ors.

W.P.(C)/5318/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (petitioner) seeking the benefit of Section 10(46) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 2019-20 to 2023-24, similar to a previous notification received for AYs 2014-15 to 2018-19. The petitioner had filed an application on 06.04.2021, followed by several reminders, but did not receive a response. The court, referencing a similar case involving the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, directed the concerned authority to address the application within a specified timeframe, ensuring a fair hearing and a reasoned decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699446 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority v. Union of India & Ors., Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAVI PRAKASH; ASTU KHANDELWAL; ABHISHEK MARATHA; AKSHAT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: JASMEET SINGH; SAIF ALI; PUSHPENDRA BHADORIYA; DIVJOT BHATIA; RUHSHEET SALUJA; VIJAY SHARMA; GARVIT THUKRAL; MAMTA CHAKRABORTY
• Keywords: Application disposal; Assessment years; Income Tax; Notification; Section 10(46)
• Section: 10(46)

Judgement Text

"2023:DHC:3645-DB W.P.(C) 5318/2023 Page 1 of 3 $~57 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 26.04.2023 + W.P.(C) 5318/2023 & CM No.20724/2023 YAMUNA EXPRESSWAY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Jasmeet Singh, Mr Saif Ali, Mr Pushpendra S. Bhadoriya, Mr Divjot Bhatia, Mr Ruhsheet Saluja, Mr Vijay Sharma, Mr Garvit Thukral & Ms Mamta Chakraborty, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Ms Astu Khandelwal, Adv. for R-1/UOI. Mr Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Akshat Singh, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL) CM Appl.20724/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 5318/2023 2. Issue notice. 2.1 Ms Astu Khandelwal, who appears on behalf of the respondent /UOI, accepts notice. 2.2 Mr Abhishek Maratha, senior standing counsel who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, accepts notice. 3. In view of the directions that we propose to pass, counsel for the Digitally Signed By:SHEHROZ ALAM Signing Date:25.05.2023 12:30:51 Signature Not Verified 2023:DHC:3645-DB W.P.(C) 5318/2023 Page 2 of 3 respondents say that no counter-affidavit is required to be filed, and that they will argue the matter, based on the record currently available with the court. 3.1 Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at this stage itself. 4. The principal grievance of the petitioner/assessee is that it has not been given benefit of the provision of Section 10(46) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”] qua the Assessment Years (AY) in issue. 5. The petitioner/assessee has filed an application, it appears, in that behalf, which is dated 06.04.2021, followed by multiple reminders for disposal of the same application. These reminders are dated 19.01.2022, 23.03.2022, 02.11.2022 and 13.12.2022. In sum, the petitioner/assessee says that the notification dated 24.12.2020, which was issued qua the petitioner/assessee, with regard to AYs 2014-15 to 2018-19 should be extended to the AYs which are subject matter of its application dated 06.04.2021. 5.1 To be noted, the AYs which are subject matter of the same application are 2019-20 to 2023-24. 6. It appears that the aforementioned notification was issued via judgment dated 25.08.2020 passed by a coordinate bench in W.P.(C)5603/2020, titled Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority v. Union of India & Ors.. 7. We may note that so far as this court is concerned, in respect of Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, a similar approach has been adopted via judgment dated 14.12.2022, passed in W.P.(C)17049/2022. 8. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of, with the following directions: Digitally Signed By:SHEHROZ ALAM Signing Date:25.05.2023 12:30:51 Signature Not Verified 2023:DHC:3645-DB W.P.(C) 5318/2023 Page 3 of 3 (i) The concerned authority will dispose of the application dated 06.04.2021 filed by the petitioner/assessee within six weeks of receipt of a copy of the judgment. (ii) The concerned authority will accord a personal hearing to the authorised representative of the petitioner/assessee. For this purpose, notice will be served on the petitioner/assessee, indicating the date, time and venue fixed for the hearing. The concerned authority will have liberty to conduct the hearing via video conferencing. (iii) The concerned authority will pass a speaking order, bearing in mind the judgments referred to hereinabove, and the notification dated 24.12.2020. 9. Needless to add, if the petitioner/assessee is aggrieved by the order passed by the concerned authority, it will have liberty to take recourse to an appropriate remedy. 10. It is also made clear that if a decision is rendered by the concerned authority which is adverse to the interest of the petitioner/assessee, the same shall not be given effect to for eight weeks, commencing from the date on which such decision is rendered. 11. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TARA VITASTA GANJU, J APRIL 26, 2023/r Click here to check corrigendum, if any Digitally Signed By:SHEHROZ ALAM Signing Date:25.05.2023 12:30:51 Signature Not Verified "