Dismissing the petition, that the assessment order revealed that during the demonetisation period, the assessee had deposited a total sum of Rs. 7,54,77,619 in cash, and when the assessee was asked to explain the source, he stated that he was running a hospital at Thanjavur, for which the tax holiday was now being sought. The hospital had been the source of a huge cash holding of Rs. 7,54,77,619. Any tax holiday can be granted to a person who declares a truthful return. It cannot and should not be granted to a person who claims that he purchased medical equipment in the guise of treating poor persons for a sum of Rs. 2,32,79,760 and it is subsequently found that the entire transaction was bogus. There was every justification in the order of the Assessing Officer invoking section 115JC which provision was squarely applicable.( AY.2013-14 to 2017-18)
S. Gurushankar v .CIT(Appeals) (2020) 427 ITR 175/ ( 2021) 277 Taxman 180/ 199 DTR 44/ 319 CTR 410 (Mad) (HC).Editorial: refer ,Gurushanakar S. v .CIT ( 2021 ) 199 DTR 42 ( Mad)) (HC) observation of single judge on merit was set aside .
S. 80IB: Industrial undertakings – Fraudulent transactions – Denial of tax holiday – Principles of natural justice is not applicable in cases of fraud . [ S. 80IB ,80IB(11C, 115JC , 153A )