TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 008, I.T.A. /7156/Mum/2008 - - - Dated:- 28-6-2016 - Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member And Pawan Singh, Judicial Member For the Revenue : Shri Vijay Kumar Soni-DR For the Assessee : Shri Mayur Kishnadwala-AR ORDER Per Rajendra, AM Challenging the order dated 12.11.2008 of CIT(A)-XXIV, Mumbai the assessees have filed the present appeals. Both the appeals are being decided by a single common order as combined issues are involved. Assessee AOP.s are engaged in executing civil contracts and construction of roads, highways etc. ITA No.7155/Mum/2008-(AY 2005-06) : 2. The effective Ground of appeal is about disallowance of claim made by the assessee u/s.80IA(4) of the Act in respect of income derived from activity of de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conformity with order of Jurisdictional High Court in case of ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra), the Assessing Officer is directed to allow deduction u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act to the assessee with regard to the projects in question for both the years. The matter is disposed off accordingly. Assessee brought the above facts before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal. 4. During the course of hearing before us the Authorised Representative brought to our notice that in case of Patel KNR, JV the Tribunal had decided identical issue in favour of the assessee (ITA No.5230/Mum/2012, AY 2008-09, dated 26.09.2014) .He relied upon the said order. Departmental Representative (DR) left the is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee was not accepted. In support of his decision, AO relied on the decision of the Larger Bench of the ITAT in the case of M/s. B.T. Patil Sons Belgaum Construction Pvt Ltd reported in 126TTJ (Mum) TM wherein the assessee was one of the intervener and it was held that, executing a mere works contract is not entitled to deduction u/s 80IA(4). Further, AO restricted the TDS credit to ₹ 5,41,78,411/-, which is proportionate to the contract receipts offered by the assessee in the year under consideration . AO invoked the provisions of section 199 of the Act in this regard. Aggrieved with the decision of the AO, assessee filed an appeal before the first appellate authority. 4. During the proceedings before the first appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalyzed the way the AO rejected the applicability of the binding judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of ABG Heavy Industries Ltd (supra).' Further, he also analyzed the applicability of the decision of various Benches of the Tribunal. In para 2.30 of the impugned order, the CIT(A) held that the Larger Bench decision in the case of B.T. Patil Sons Belgaum ,Construction Pvt. Ltd. (supra), is no longer a good law considering the binding judgment of the' Hon ble High Court in the case of ABG, Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) and other decisions of the Tribunal. Further, he analyzed: another judgment of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of M/s. KMC Constructions Ltd vs. CIT, 21 Taxmann.com 138 (Hyderabad), dated 16.3.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the conditions specified in the said sub-section (4) of Section 80IA of the Act. It is also demonstrated before us that the Larger Bench decision in the case of B.T, Patil Sons Belgaum Construction Pvt Ltd (supra) is no longer a valid law as the said judgment was reversed after hearing the case in compliance with the directions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the decision of the CIT(A) on this issue is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, ground no.1 is allowed in favour of the assessee. Respectfully following the above order for 2008-09 we decide the effective Ground of appeal in favour of the assessee. ITA 7156/Mum/2008 (2005-06): 7. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
