Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Forum Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News What's New Calendar Imp. Links Database More...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Mahalaxmi Construction Corporation Ltd. Versus ACIT, Circle-2, Kolhapur

Denial of deduction u/s.80IA(4) - whether Government or Statutory body is the developer of infrastructure facility and here appellant is not entitled to deduction under the section? - Held that:- As decided in CIT vs. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd & Ors (2010 (2) TMI 108 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ) that even in the case before the Hon’ble High Court, the assessee acted as a contractor for Government agency, was held eligible for the purposes of claim of deduction u/s 80IA( 4) of the Income Tax Act. As per .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

maintains and operates an infrastructural facility. In other words a developer who only develops (i.e., constructs) an infrastructural facility is not envisaged to operate and maintain such facility, cannot be accepted to fulfil the condition in clause (c) of sec. 80IA( 4) since it would be an impossibility. Therefore, in view of the construction placed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on the requirements of clause (c) of sec. 80IA( 4)(i) requiring it to be harmoniously read with the main sec. 8 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

5 and 2005-06 respectively. For the sake of convenience, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Although a number of grounds have been taken by the assessee for both the assessment years, however, they all relate to the order of the CIT(A) in upholding the denial of deduction u/s.80IA(4) of ₹ 84,02,555/- for Assessment Year 2004-05 and ₹ 1,46,85,364/- for Assessment Year 2005-06 respectively. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2003-04 upheld the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. Similarly for Assessment Year 2005-06 the AO disallowed claim of deduction of ₹ 1,46,85, 364/- u/s.80IA(4) in the order passed u/s.143(3) dated 25-04-2007 which was upheld by the CIT(A) vide order dated 16-11-2007. The Tribunal vide order dated 25-11-2010 following the order for A.Y. 2003-04 in assessee s own case vide ITA No.433/PN/2007 order dated 24- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Assessee has in respect of assessment year 200506 raised the following question of law for our consideration. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case on a proper and reasonable interpretation of S.80IA(4), the Tribunal is right in holding that Government or Statutory body is the developer of infrastructure facility and here appellant is not entitled to deduction under that section? 3. The Tribunal, while dismissing the Assessee s Appeal followed its order for assessment year .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l, for fresh decision in accordance with law. 4. All the contentions of the parties are kept open to be urged before the Tribunal. 5. The appeal is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs. (Identical order has been passed by the Hon ble High court for A.Y. 2005-06) 6. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides. We find after the order for A.Y. 2003-04 was set aside by the Hon ble Bombay High Court to the file of the Tribunal, the Tribunal vide ITA No.433/PN/2007 orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ase of B.T. Patil & Sons Belgam Construction (P) Ltd vs. ACIT 126 TTJ (Mum) (TM) 577. The Hon ble High Court has observed that it is not in dispute that the said decision of the Tribunal in the case of B.T. Patil & Sons (supra) has been recalled by the Tribunal by order dated 18.2.2011 as evident from the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.766/PN/2009 dated 8.6.2011. The Hon ble High Court has accordingly quashed and set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal dated 24.2.2010 passed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sion which was urged on behalf of the Revenue is that under cl. (iii) of subsec. (4A) of sec. 80IA, one of the conditions imposed was that the enterprise must start operating and maintaining the infrastructure facility on or after 1st April, 1995. The same requirement is embodies in subcl. (c) of subsec. (4) of the amended provisions of sec. 80IA. On this basis, it was urged that since the assessee was not operating and maintaining the facility, he did not fulfil the condition. This submission i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

st April, 1995. After sec. 80IA was amended by the Finance Act of 2001, the section applied to an enterprise carrying on the business of (i) developing; or (ii) operating and maintaining; or (iii) developing, operating and maintaining any infrastructure facility which fulfils certain conditions. Those conditions are : (i) Ownership of the enterprise by a company registered in India or by a consortium; (ii) An agreement with the Central or State Government, local authority or statutory body; and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ect and intent underlying the amendment of the provision by the Finance Act of 2001 would be defeated. A harmonious reading of the provision in its entirety would lead to the conclusion that the deduction is available to an enterprise which (i) develops; or (ii) operates and maintains; or (iii) develops, maintains and operates that infrastructure facility should be after 1st April, 1995. In the present case, the assessee clearly fulfilled this condition. 23. In view of which we have taken, all t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ance Act of 2001, we have already noted that the consistent line of circulars of the Board postulated the same position. The amendment made by Parliament to sec. 80IA( 4) of the Act set the matter beyond any controversy by stipulating that the three conditions for development, operation and maintenance were not intended to be cumulative in nature. 9. We find from the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in aforesaid case of CIT vs. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd & Ors (supra) that even in the cas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

  ↓     Latest Happening     ↓  

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply for the purposes of computing exemption u/s 11 to 13.

Highlight: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability - CBDT issues draft notification

TMI Note: Certain ICDS provisions are inconsistent with judicial precedents. Whether these judicial precedents would prevail over ICDS.

Highlight: Provisions of ICDS shall prevail w.e.f. AY 2017-18 to the transactional issues dealt therein over earlier judicial pronouncements.

Notification: Levy of anti dumping duty on New/unused pneumatic radial tyres with or without tubes and/or flap of rubber (including tubeless tyres) having normal rim dia code above 16 originating in, or exported from China PR

News: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability

TMI Note: In case of conflict between ICDS and other specific provisions of the Income-tax rules, 1962 governing taxation of income like rules 9A, 9B etc. of the Rules, which provisions shall prevail.

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply to computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act or Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act.

TMI Note: Where a term has not been defined under ICDS, nor under the Act, but has different interpretations given to it by the courts in tax cases, and in ICAI Accounting Standards, which interpretation would prevail while interpreting ICDS.

TMI Note: Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA).

TMI Note: In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, which would prevail over the other.

TMI Note: ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific disclosures. Where is the taxpayer required to make such disclosures specified in ICDS.

Notification: Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) - New ICDS to be effective from AY 2017-18

Forum: Input credit of gst paid on urd

Forum: Wrong quote of GSTIN no of buyer in GSTR-1

Forum: Getting upload error message.Cannot upload json file for GSTR1 even after using offline tool V 1.2..

Forum: Issue of Payment Voucher

Forum: filing of unaudited financial accounts

Forum: GST on Notional rent

Forum: need of extention of agm in case of non filing

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Highlight: GST - Detention of goods under transport - discrepancy in documents - the statutory provisions provide a mechanism for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication - HC

Highlight: Reassessment - first few paragraphs of the assessment order dealt with objections and disposed of accordingly - Unfortunately, the manner in which the AO has decided the issue is wholly unsustainable in law - HC

Highlight: Business expenditure u/s 37 - liquidated damage - breach of contract terms - Expenditure was not incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law - cannot be disallowed - HC

Highlight: Valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - managing participation of clients in certain mela, fairs, promotional activities etc. - They are liable to service tax on the gross amount received - They cannot restrict their tax liability to only agency commission

Highlight: TDS liability - ITAT confirmed the liability - We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion - HC

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - sufficiency of material available with the AO to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment - bogus purchases - seller refused to respond - notice would not be interfered with - HC

Highlight: Exemption u/s 11 - education activities - transport and hostel facilities surplus cannot be considered as business income of the assessee society

News: Draft Notification for insertion of new rule 39A in the Income-tax Rules, 1962 – comments and suggestions-reg.

Highlight: Genuineness of labour wages expenses, embroidery charges, fabrication expenses etc. - getting work done through small workmen who do not have any permanent place of residence - disallowance of ad hoc expenditure deleted.

Highlight: Project import - Since the goods were never used for the purpose for which it was imported, the actual user condition has been violated - Redemption fine and penalty imposed.

Highlight: Penalty u/s 112 (a) - CHA - Lack of due diligence and failure to take more precautions can not, by itself, bring in penal consequences

Highlight: Import of services - GST - The fact that those services were received outside India will not change the fact that the services have been paid for by the beneficiary appellant, who is located in India. - Demand confirmed.

Notification: SEZ for IT/ITES at Madhurwada Village, Visakhapatnam District in the State of Andhra Pradesh - denotified.

Highlight: Merely because payment is received in Indian rupee, it cannot be said that payment against export has not been received in convertible foreign exchange.

Highlight: Merely vehicle numbers was not mentioned on the invoices cannot be the reason to deny Cenvat Credit

Highlight: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 120A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 - Circular

Circular: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 120A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017

News: Auction for Sale (Re-issue) of Government Stocks

Article: TDS APPLICABILITY ON GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS UNDER GST (Under Section 51 of the CGST Act, 2017)

News: Manmohan takes potshots at note ban, 'hasty' rollout of GST

News: GST on petrol, diesel requires wider discussion: Nitish

Article: WHEN CAN ONE TAKE ITC FOR RCM CASES?

Notification: TDS liability under Section 51 of CGST, 2017 come into force w.e.f. 18-9-2017 - Persons liable to deduct TDS from payment made or credited to the supplier of taxable goods or services specified

Notification: Central Goods and Services Tax (Seventh Amendment) Rules, 2017

Notification: Seeks to extend the last date for filing the return in FORM GSTR-3B for the months of August to December, 2017

Circular: Filing of Special Leave Petition against Orders of Hon'ble High Courts staying Collection of Tax under GST- reg.

Highlight: Exemption u/s 54F - LTCCG - once entire net consideration is invested, the absence of completion certificate cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of deduction.

Highlight: Deduction u/s 10B - initial AY - Mere authorization to enable the Assessee to import material or export produce in the earlier date would not ipso facto tantamount to commencement of substantial activity of ‘manufacture’/’production’.

Circular: Sub:- Procedure to be followed for Import under DEEC/EPCG Scheme- reg.



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version