9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 2019X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uctions u/s 80-IA (4) as the returns were filed after the period prescribed by law - HELD THAT:- It is observed that the issue of filing of returns after the date prescribed by law was taken up by the respondent before this Court in M/S DILIP BUILDCON LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA OTHERS [ 2016 (7) TMI 215 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] allowed the petition setting aside the order passed by the Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ads as a contractor and, therefore, as he was only a works contractor, the benefit of the provisions relating to work undertaken for infrastructural development would not have been availed by the respondent and has wrongly been allowed by the Settlement Commission, is to be rejected as Settlement Commission has discussed these aspects extensively - The aforesaid finding in favour of the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons under Section 80-IA (4) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) without taking into consideration the fact that the said claim for deduction could have been considered only in case the return of income had been filed on or before the due date specified under Section 139 (1) of the Act. It is submitted that as the returns were filed after the period prescribed by law, theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 90/2015, the issue regarding delay in filing the return does not survive and has been finally settled in favour of the respondent. In view of the order passed by this Court, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Settlement Commission has wrongly allowed deductions under Section 80- IA (4) of the Act, without taking into consideration the aspect of delay, has no merit an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
