{"id":18511,"date":"2018-05-19T12:02:42","date_gmt":"2018-05-19T06:32:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?p=18511"},"modified":"2018-05-19T12:02:42","modified_gmt":"2018-05-19T06:32:42","slug":"mahabir-industries-vs-pcit-supreme-court-s-80-ic-the-fact-that-the-assessee-has-earlier-availed-deduction-u-s-80-ia-80-ib-is-of-no-concern-because-deduction-u-s-80-ic-is-available-from-the-initi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/mahabir-industries-vs-pcit-supreme-court-s-80-ic-the-fact-that-the-assessee-has-earlier-availed-deduction-u-s-80-ia-80-ib-is-of-no-concern-because-deduction-u-s-80-ic-is-available-from-the-initi\/","title":{"rendered":"Mahabir Industries vs. PCIT (Supreme Court)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A  short question of law arises for consideration in these    appeals.  All the appeals are filed by the same party, namely,    Mahabir  Industries (hereinafter referred to as the &lsquo;assessee&rsquo;) in    which  common respondent is Principal Commissioner of Income    Tax  (hereinafter referred to as the &lsquo;Department&rsquo;). <\/p>\n<p>Before  stating    the  question of law, it may be necessary to mention in brief the    background  under which the said question of law has arisen    inasmuch  as this background would be an enabling factor in    understanding  the true ambit and scope of the question of law.<\/p>\n<p>The  assessee manufactures polythene for which it is having    its  factory in Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. The activity undertaken    by  the assessee, an industrial undertaking, qualified for    exemption  from income tax under Section 80-IA of the Income    Tax  Act (hereinafter referred to as the &lsquo;Act&rsquo;). <\/p>\n<p>Section  80-IA of the    Act  provides for deductions in respect of profits and gains from    industrial  undertakings or enterprises engaged in infrastructure    development  etc. if it fulfills the conditions mentioned in subsection    (4)  thereof. <\/p>\n<p>Such  a deduction is of an amount equal to    hundred  per cent of the profits and gains derived from such    business  for ten consecutive Assessment Years. In nutshell,    those  undertakings or enterprises, which fulfill the conditions    mentioned  in sub-section (4) of Section 80-IA of the Act, are    entitled  to total deductions of their profits, which means, no tax is    payable  and the period for which such undertakings or    enterprises  are exempted from payment of tax is ten consecutive    Assessment  Years. <\/p>\n<p>The  assessee admittedly qualified for this    deduction  which it started availing from the Assessment Year    1998-99.  This deduction under Section 80-IA was claimed and    allowed  for two Assessment Years i.e. 1998-99 and 1999-2000.<\/p>\n<p>2.  Section 80-IA of the Act was originally introduced in the year 1991    by  the Finance (No.2) Act, 1991 w.e.f. April 1, 1991. There were    amendments  in the Section from time to time. This Section was    amended  by the Finance Act, 1999 w.e.f. April   1, 2000. <\/p>\n<p>Along    with  this provision, Section 80-IB was also introduced for the first    time  by the same Finance Act, 1999. This provision allows    deduction  in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial    undertakings  other than infrastructure development undertakings.    Deduction  from such profits and gains is of an amount equal to    such  percentage and for such number of Assessment Years as    specified  in Section 80-IB. <\/p>\n<p>Sub-section  (4) of Section 80-IB    provides  for hundred per cent deduction for a period of five years    and  thereafter twenty-five per cent. First proviso thereto states    that  total period of deduction is not to exceed ten consecutive    Assessment  Years. Second proviso is a specific provision for    industries  in the North-Eastern Region to which we shall advert to    at  the appropriate stage. Sub-section (2) enumerates the    conditions  which are to be fulfilled by such industrial undertakings    in  order to qualify for deductions from profits and gains under that    provision.<\/p>\n<p>3.  As mentioned above, for the Assessment Years 1998-99 and    1999-2000  (i.e. two Assessment Years), the assessee was    allowed  deduction under Section 80-IA. From the Assessment    Year  2000-01 to Assessment Year 2005-06, the assessee    claimed  deduction under Section 80-IB.<\/p>\n<p>4.  Interestingly, another provision in the form of Section 80-IC was    inserted  by Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. April   1, 2004. As per this    provision,  certain undertakings or enterprises in certain special    category  States are allowed deduction from such profits and    gains,  as specified in sub-section (3) of Section 80-IC. <\/p>\n<p>The    provisions  of Section 80-IC provided deduction to manufacturing    units  situated in the State of Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh and    Uttaranchal  and North-Eastern   States.  The deduction was    provided  to new units established in the aforesaid States, and    also  to existing units in those States if substantial expansion was    carried  out. The deduction was available @100% for ten    Assessment  Years for the units located in North-Eastern and in    the  State of Sikkim  and for the units located in Himachal Pradesh,    the  deduction was available @100% for five years and @25% for    next  five years. <\/p>\n<p>The  assessee completed substantial expansion    (by  investing in new plant and machinery of value more than 50%    of  the value of plant and machinery already installed as on 1 April,    2005)  to the manufacturing unit situated at Baddi, Himachal    Pradesh  in the Assessment Year 2006-07. <\/p>\n<p>In  view of the    substantial  expansion, the accused claimed deduction under    Section  80-IC @100% for Assessment Years 2006-07 and 2007-    08,  which was also allowed by the Assessing Officer (AO) after    passing  the order under Section 143(3) of the Act.<\/p>\n<p>5.  Sub-section (3), as noted above, mentions the period of ten    Assessment  Years commencing with the initial Assessment Year.    Sub-section  (6) may also be taken note of at this stage which    reads  as under:<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;(6)  Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no    deduction  shall be allowed to any undertaking or enterprise    under  this section, where the total period of deduction    inclusive  of the period of deduction under this section, or    under  the second proviso to sub-section (4) of section 80-    IB  or under section 10C, as the case may be, exceeds ten    assessment  years.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>6.  As noted above, the assessee had carried out substantial    expansion  in the Assessment Year 2006-07 and, therefore,    claimed  exemption under Section 80-IC of the Act for Assessment    Year  2006-07 onwards. Deductions for the year 2006-07 and    2007-08  were allowed. However, thereafter, deductions for the    Assessment  Year 2008-09 and Assessment Year 2009-2010 were    rejected  by the AO on the ground that this was 11th and  12th year    of  deduction and as per Section 80-IC(6), total deductions under    Section  80-IC and Section 80-IB cannot exceed the total period of    ten  years. <\/p>\n<p>Commissioner  of Income Tax (Appeals) {CIT(A)} and    Income  Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the order of the AO.    The  High Court took up the appeals of the assessee along with    other  similar enterprises who had claimed the benefits. It framed    the  following question in those appeals:<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;The  moot issue involved in these appeals, <em>inter  alia<\/em>, is as    to  whether an &ldquo;undertaking or an enterprise&rdquo; (hereinafter    referred  to as the Unit), established after 7th January, 2003,    carrying  out &ldquo;substantial expansion&rdquo; within the specified    window  period, i.e. between 7.1.2003 and 1.4.2012, would    be  entitled to deduction on profits @100%, under Section    80-IC  of the Income Tax Act. Also, if so, then for what    period.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>7.  This question has been decided in favour of all the assessees.<\/p>\n<p>However,  insofar as the assessee herein is concerned, keeping in    view  that there is a ceiling of ten years as stipulated under    Section  80-IC(6), the High Court has held that ten years period    shall  be counted from the Assessment Year 1998-99 when the    assessee  had claimed deduction for the first time under Section    80-IA  and, therefore, deductions for the Assessment Years 2008-    09  and 2009-2010 would not be allowed. This is clear from the    following  discussion in the High Court judgment:<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;46.  The moment &ldquo;substantial expansion&rdquo; is completed as    per  Section 80-IC (8)(ix), the statutory definition of &ldquo;initial    assessment  year&rdquo; [Section 80-IC(8)(v)] comes into play.    And  consequently, Section 80-IC(3)(ii) entitles the unit to    100%  deduction for five years commencing with completion    of  &ldquo;substantial expansion&rdquo;, subject to maximum of ten    years  as per Section 80-IC(6).<\/p>\n<p>47.  A unit that started operating\/existed before 7.1.2003    was  entitled to 100% deduction for first five years under    Section  80-IB(4). If this unit completes substantial    expansion  during the window period (7.1.2003 to    31.3.2012),  it would be eligible for 100% deduction again    for  another five years under Section 80-IC(3)(ii), subject to    ceiling  of ten years as stipulated under Section 80-IC(6).<\/p>\n<p>48.  Applying the aforesaid interpretation, we find there can    be  different fact situations, some of which, we have tried to    illustrate; <\/p>\n<p>(i)  a &ldquo;Unit&rdquo; established prior to 7.1.2003, claiming    deduction  under Section 80-IB, post insertion of Section    80-IC  carries out substantial expansion, would be entitled    to  deduction only under Section 80-IC, at the admissible    percentage,  for the remaining period, which in any case    when  combined, cannot exceed ten years, <\/p>\n<p>(ii)  just as in the    case  of the present assessee, a unit established after    7.1.2003,  carries out substantial expansion only in the 8th    year  of its establishment, for the first five years would have    already  claimed deduction @ 100%; for the 6th and 7th    years  @ 25%, and then for the period post substantial    expansion,  in our considered view, the initial year of    assessment  being in the 8th year, would be entitled for    deduction  @ 100%, subject to the cap of ten assessment    years, <\/p>\n<p>(iii)  the assessee establishes a unit after January    2003,  say in the year 2005-06 and claims deduction under    Section  80-IC for the first time in the assessment year    2006-2007  @ 100% of its profits. Thereafter, substantially    expands  the Unit in the year 2009-10, relevant to    Assessment  Year 2010-11 can claim deduction @ 100%    for  next five years subject to the cap of ten assessment    years, <\/p>\n<p>(iv)  an existing unit not claiming any deduction under    Section  80-IA, 80-IB or 80-IC substantially expands in the    year  2003 and claims deduction under Section 80-IC first    time  in Assessment Year 2004-2005 and then substantially    expands  in the year 2007-2008, can claim deduction @    100%  w.e.f. Assessment Year 2008-2009 for next five    years, <\/p>\n<p>(v)  the assessee sets up its unit in the year 2000-    2001,  claiming deduction under Section 80-IB till the    Assessment  Year 2003-2004 and thereafter under Section    80-IC  as per law. Carrying out Substantial expansion in the    Assessment  Year 2004-2005, now claims deduction @    100%  w.e.f. Assessment Year 2004-05 again substantially    expands  in the Assessment Year 2008-2009 can claim    100%  deduction w.e.f. 2008-2009, (vi) the assessee sets    up  a unit in the year 2005-2006 and does not undergo    substantial  expansion at all can claim deduction under    Section  80-IC.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>8.  As can be discerned, all other aspects are decided in favour of    the  assessees except what is illustrated at (i) and (iv). However,    the  effect thereof is that insofar as appeals of the assessee    herein  are concerned, they are dismissed on the ground that it    cannot  claim deduction under Sections 80-IC, 80-IB or 10C for a    period  exceeding ten years.<\/p>\n<p>9.  In this backdrop, the questions of law which have been framed by    the  assessee in these appeals are the following:<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;(a)  Whether the Hon&rsquo;ble High Court was justified in holding    that  the petitioner was not entitled to deduction under    Section  80-IC of the Act by virtue of provision sub-section    (6),  when the same was not even applicable to the    petitioner?<\/p>\n<p>(b)  Whether the Hon&rsquo;ble High Court was justified in holding    that  the provisions of Section 80-IC(6) of the Act apply to all    the  undertaking claiming deduction under Section 80-IB(4)    of  the Act when 80-IC(6) refers to only those undertakings    which  are covered by second proviso to Section 80-IB(4)?<\/p>\n<p>(c)  Whether the Hon&rsquo;ble High Court was justified in holding    that  the petitioner is not eligible for deduction under    Section  80-IC for a period of 10 assessment years when    substantial  expansion was carried out by the Petitioner and    a  substantially new unit was claiming deduction under    Section  80-IC of the Act?<\/p>\n<p>(d)  Whether the Hon&rsquo;ble High Court was justified in holding    that  the petitioner was not entitled to deduction under    Section  80-IC of the Act for assessment year 2008-09 and    2009-10  when the total period of deduction of ten years    was  expiring after assessment year 2009-10?&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>10.  As can be seen from the reading of paras 46 and 47 of the High    Court  judgment, it has taken a categorical view that the moment    &lsquo;<em>substantial expansion<\/em>&rsquo; is  completed as per Section 80-IC(8)(ix),    the  statutory definition of &lsquo;<em>initial  assessment year<\/em>&rsquo; {Section 80-    IC(8)(v)}  comes into play. <\/p>\n<p>As  a consequence, Section 80-IC(3)(ii)    would  entitle the unit to hundred per cent deduction for five years    commencing  with completion of &lsquo;<em>substantial expansion<\/em>&rsquo;  followed    by  twenty-five per cent deduction for next five years i.e. subject to    maximum  of ten years. <\/p>\n<p>Thus,  the High Court accepts that when    the  substantial expansion is done in a particular Assessment Year    and  that is made during the period mentioned in sub-section (2)    of  Section 80-IC, not only benefit admissible under Section 80-IC    shall  get triggered, the year in which such substantial expansion    is  completed is to be treated as &lsquo;<em>initial  assessment year<\/em>&rsquo;. Having    said  so, it has put a cap of ten years by invoking the provision of    Section  80-IC(6). <\/p>\n<p>We  have already reproduced the provisions of    sub-section  (6) of Section 80-IC. As per this provision, no    deduction  is allowed to any undertaking or enterprise under this    Section,  where the total period of deduction inclusive of the    period  of deduction under this Section, or under the second    proviso  to sub-section (4) of Section 80-IB or under Section 10C,    as  the case may be, exceeds ten assessment years. The total    period  of ten years, thus, is to be counted in the following three    circumstances:<\/p>\n<p>(a)  When the deduction has been given under Section 80-IC for    a  period of ten years, no further deduction is admissible.<\/p>\n<p>(b)  When the deduction is given under second proviso to subsection    (4)  of Section 80-IB. The said second proviso reads as    under:<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;Provided  further than in the case of such industries in the    North-Eastern  Region, as may be notified by the Central    Government,  the amount of deduction shall be hundred per    cent.  of profits and gains for a period of ten assessment    years,  and the total period of deduction shall in such a case    not  exceed ten assessment years.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>This  provision pertains to those industries which are in the    North-Eastern  Region.<\/p>\n<p>(c)  When the deduction is claimed under Section 10C. It is    again  a special provision in respect of certain industrial    undertakings  in North-Eastern Region.<\/p>\n<p>11.  The assessee in the instant case has not got deduction under    Section  80-IC for a period of ten years as he started claiming    deduction  under this provision w.e.f. Assessment Year 2006-07.    Situation  Nos. (b) and (c) mentioned above would not apply to the    assessee  as it&rsquo;s undertaking\/enterprise is not established in    North-Eastern  Region. <\/p>\n<p>It  is, thus, clear that the High Court has    failed  to appreciate that the provisions of Section 80-IC(6) of the    Act  state that the total period of deduction under Section 80-IC    and  Section 80-IB cannot exceed ten assessment years only if    the  manufacturing unit was claiming deduction under second    proviso  to Section 80-IB(4) of the Act i.e. units located in the    North-Eastern   State.<\/p>\n<p>12.  The matter can be looked into from another angle. Under Section    80-IA,  deduction is provided to such industrial undertakings or    enterprises  which are engaged in infrastructure development etc.    provided  they fulfill the conditions mentioned in sub-section (4)    thereof. <\/p>\n<p>Section  80-IB makes provisions for deduction in respect    of  those industrial undertakings, other than infrastructure    development  undertakings, which are enumerated in the said    provision. <\/p>\n<p>On  the other hand, the intention behind Section 80-IC    is  to grant deduction to the units making new investments in the    State  by establishing new manufacturing unit or even to the    existing  manufacturing unit which carried out substantial    expansions. <\/p>\n<p>The  purport behind the three types of deductions    specified  in Section 80-IA, Section 80-IB and Section 80-IC is,    thus,  different. Section 80-IC stipulates the period for which    hundred  per cent deduction is to be given and then deduction at    reduced  rates is to be given. <\/p>\n<p>If  the assessee had earlier availed    deduction  under Section 80-IA and Section 80-IB, that would be    of  no concern inasmuch as on carrying out substantial expansion,    which  was carried out and completed in the Assessment Year    2006-07,  the assessee became entitled to deduction under    Section  80-IC from the initial year. <\/p>\n<p>The  term &lsquo;<em>initial year<\/em>&rsquo;  is    referable  to the year in which substantial expansion has been    completed,  which legal position is stated by the High Court itself    and  even accepted by the Department as it has not challenged    that  part of the judgment. The inclusion of period for the    deduction  is availed under Section 80-IA and Section 80-IB, for    the  purpose of counting ten years, is provided in sub-section (6)    of  Section 80-IC and it is limited to those industrial undertakings    or  enterprises which are set-up in the North-Eastern Region. <\/p>\n<p>By    making  specific provision of this kind, the Legislature has shown    its  intent, namely, where the industry is not located in North-    Eastern   State,  the period for which deduction is availed earlier by    an  assessee under Section 80-IA and Section 80-IB will not be    reckoned  for the purpose of availing benefit of deduction under    Section  80-IC of the Act.<\/p>\n<p>13.  Learned counsel for the Revenue could not dispute that subsection    (6)  of Section 80-IC would get attracted when the industry    is  located in the North-Eastern Region. <\/p>\n<p>Having  faced with this    situation,  he raised an altogether different argument for    consideration  by referring to Section 15C of the Income Tax Act,    1922  (hereinafter referred to as the &lsquo;1922 Act&rsquo;), which was also a    provision  which granted exemption from income in respect of    newly  established industrial undertaking. <\/p>\n<p>He  submitted that this    Court  in <strong><em>Textile Machinery Corporation  Limited, <\/em><\/strong><strong><em>Calcutta<\/em><\/strong>v. <strong><em>The Commissioner of Income Tax, <\/em><\/strong><strong><em>West Bengal<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>, <\/em><\/strong><strong><em>Calcutta<\/em><\/strong> 1 (1977) 2 SCC 368     has  held that the true test for ascertaining whether industrial    undertaking  is &lsquo;<em>formed by reconstruction of  business already in<\/em> <em>existence<\/em>&rsquo; (which was  the expression used in Section 15C of    1922  Act), is not whether the new industrial undertaking connotes    expansion  of the existing business of the assessee but whether it    is  a new and identifiable undertaking separate and distinct from    existing  business. <\/p>\n<p>In  fine, the endeavour of learned senior    counsel  was that the assessee cannot be treated as an industrial    undertaking  which has reconstructed the business i.e. made    substantial  expansion. This argument has to be rejected for at    least  two reasons:<\/p>\n<p>(i)  Section 15C of the 1922 Act provided exemption from tax to    newly  established industrial undertaking if they are not &lsquo;<em>formed by<\/em> <em>reconstruction of business already in existence<\/em>&rsquo;. <\/p>\n<p>Thus,  under the    said  provision, if it was found that an industrial undertaking is    formed  by reconstruction of business already in existence, then it    was  entitled to any exemption under Section 15C. <\/p>\n<p>It  is in that    context  the Court was considering the meaning of reconstruction    of  business. On the other hand, the words under Section 80-IC    are  &lsquo;substantial expansion&rsquo;. Thus, discussion contained in the    said  judgment would have no application to the instant case.<\/p>\n<p>(ii)  Insofar as the factum of substantial expansion of the    assessee&rsquo;s  unit in the Assessment Year 2006-07 is concerned,    the  same is not subject matter of any controversy in the instant    case.  It has been accepted by the Department that assessee had    carried  out substantial expansion. <\/p>\n<p>Precisely,  for this reason, the    AO  had allowed deduction for Assessment Years 2006-07 and    2007-08.  Therefore, issue is not as to whether there is a    substantial  expansion or not. The issue is only as to how a    period  of ten years is to be calculated, namely, whether those    Assessment  Years in respect of which deduction under Section    80-IA  and Section 80-IB was allowed are to be counted for the    purpose  of giving deduction under Section 80-IC.<\/p>\n<p>14.  Thus, we are of the opinion that it was wrong on the part of the    AO  not to allow deduction to the assessee under Section 80-IC    for  the Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-2010. As a result,    the  judgment of the High Court on this aspect is set aside and the    appeals are accordingly allowed. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>If the assessee had earlier availed deduction under Section 80-IA and Section 80-IB, that would be of no concern inasmuch as on carrying out substantial expansion, which was carried out and completed in the Assessment Year 2006-07, the assessee became entitled to deduction under Section 80-IC from the initial year. The term \u2018initial year\u2019 is referable to the year in which substantial expansion has been completed, which legal position is stated by the High Court itself and even accepted by the Department as it has not challenged that part of the judgment. The inclusion of period for the deduction is availed under Section 80-IA and Section 80-IB, for the purpose of counting ten years, is provided in sub-section (6) of Section 80-IC and it is limited to those industrial undertakings or enterprises which are set-up in the North-Eastern Region. By making specific provision of this kind, the Legislature has shown its intent, namely, where the industry is not located in North- Eastern State, the period for which deduction is availed earlier by an assessee under Section 80-IA and Section 80-IB will not be reckoned for the purpose of availing benefit of deduction under Section 80-IC of the Act.<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/mahabir-industries-vs-pcit-supreme-court-s-80-ic-the-fact-that-the-assessee-has-earlier-availed-deduction-u-s-80-ia-80-ib-is-of-no-concern-because-deduction-u-s-80-ic-is-available-from-the-initi\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[4,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18511","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-judgements","category-supreme-court","judges-a-k-sikri-j","judges-ashok-bhushan-j","section-80-ib","section-80-ic","counsel-499","court-supreme-court","catchwords-80-ia-deduction","catchwords-initial-assessment-year","catchwords-substantial-expansion","genre-domestic-tax"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18511","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18511"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18511\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18511"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18511"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18511"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}