9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n BOT basis, manufacturing of PSC pipes, trading in MS plates and pipes etc. The assessee filed the return of income on 30-09-2009 declaring total income of Nil after claiming deduction of Rs. 15,33,36,705/- u/s.80IA(4) of the I.T. Act which was revised to Rs. 10,92,36,658/- during the course of assessment proceedings. The AO disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs. 15,33,36,705/- which was revised to Rs. 10,92,36,658/- on the ground that the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act. While doing so, the AO followed the order of his predecessor for A.Y. 2007-08 wherein similar disallowance was made for the following reasons : "i. The assessee company is only a contractor and not a developer of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;s case. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact that assessee failed to establish that it was a developer as stipulated in the provision of section 80IA(4) of the Act; hence ineligible for claimed deduction. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) did not appreciate the fact that on being confronted by the Assessing officer during assessment proceedings for A.Yr.2009-10 regarding eligibility for deduction u/s.80IA(4), assessee voluntarily revised its claim of deduction from Rs. 15,33,36,705/- to Rs. 10,92,36,658/-. The CIT has erred in allowing deduction u/s 80(IA)(4) Rs. 10,92,36,658/- 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in case it is accepted, then the said deduction shall not be allowable to any person in India as all such infrastructure work is awarded by Govt. & Semi govt. Departments to developer contractors through tenders and thereafter entering into contract for the work with the developers. In case the Assessing Officer's contention is accepted then certainly provision for allowing deduction u/s. 80IA(4) for developing infrastructure shall become redundent". The Assessing Officer has ignored the decision of the ITAT Pune Bench - in the case M/s Pratibha Construction & Engineering Pvt. Ltd, wherein relying on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of ABG Heavy Engineering Ltd., has decided issue in favour of assessee. The assessee company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have executed the said infrastructure project of water supply and lift irrigation. The Assessing Officer has not justified to hold that the work has been executed by JMC as developer and the appellant is a mere contractor. 3.7 As regards preparation of design and drawing of the project it is evident form the following documents/papers that the appellant has in fact prepared the same. Annex-4, appearing on page no. 177 of the tender of Mokhabardi Lift Irrigation Scheme, relevant portion of which reads as under : "PARAMETERS FOR DESIGN AND DRAWING" 1.0 SCOPE OF PROPOSED IRRIGA TION SCHEME As stated in Annex "A " of Section-1. 2.0 DESIGN AND DRA WING. 2.1 The contractor/consultant shall carry out layout studies including cost economics by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... introduced by Finance Act, 2007 and amended by Finance Act 2009 with retrospective effect from 01-04- 2000. Assessing Officer has also disallowed the appellant's claim for deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Act, holding that the appellant was not a developer but only a contractor. Further, according to the AO, the 'explanation' inserted below Sub-sec. 80IA(13) by the Finance Act, 2007 and later amended by Finance Act 2009, effective retrospectively from 01-04-2000 also made the appellant ineligible for deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Assessing Officer has given a detailed analysis of appellant's contract with Jalgaon Municipal Corporation (JMC) in the assessment order for A. Y. 2008-09 and also referred to the statement of Dy. E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne and also in order to maintain the rule of consistency and uniformity in respect of identical facts, he was of the considered view that the above discussed decisions of the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune, Jaipur Benches and ABH Heavy Industries (supra) in regard to claim of deductions u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act are squarely applicable to the appellant's case. Nothing contrary was brought to our knowledge on behalf of revenue. In view of above judicial precedents the appellant has rightly been held eligible for deductions u/s. 80IA (4) of the Act in respect of the infrastructural projects undertaken by it during Ays 2007-08 and 2008-09. We uphold the same." 6. We find on further appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
