Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (6) TMI 599 - ITAT HYDERABADDeduction u/s.80IA disallowed - AO denied the claim of the assessee on the ground that assessee was not developer rather a work contractor - Held that:- As relying on assessee's own case [2012 (8) TMI 633 - ITAT HYDERABAD] there is no requirement that the assessee should have been the owner of the infrastructure facility - the contractor and the developer cannot be viewed differently. Every contractor may not be a developer but every developer developing infrastructure facility on behalf of the Government is a contractor. The assessee has developed infrastructure facility as per the agreement with Maharashtra Government/APSEB, therefore, merely because in the agreement for development of infrastructure facility the assessee is referred to as a contractor or because some basic specifications are laid down, it does not detract the assessee from the position of being a ‘developer’ nor will it debar the assessee from claiming deduction u/s 80IA(4). In favour of assessee. Disallowance of interest - whether investments were made out of its own funds or loan funds? - Held that:- There is no dispute that monies have been given to the other parties for business purposes. It is a common trade practice to give advances to the parties to carry on the work on behalf of the assessee. When the assessee has not charged interest on such loans given, the CIT(A) is not entitled to work out any notional interest and make any disallowance/addition to that extent.See S.A. Builders V/s. CIT(2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT). Thus additions deleted. In favour of assessee.
|