TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the nature (emphasis supplied) of contract and not only contract. Here the project costs and source thereof not being revenue of the appellant, it being not affected by the actual cost and efficiency of work, the assets created and the source not being of the appellant at any stage and it being entitled to a fixed remuneration for its professional services; it clearly is falling in the excluded category as per the amended Explanation below section 80IA(13); and therefore, not eligible for deduction. - Decided against assessee. - ITA.No.185/Ahd/2017 - - - Dated:- 1-11-2018 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Mehul K. Patel, AR For The Revenue : Shri Mudit Na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 014 has been placed on record. The discussion made by the Tribunal on this issue reads as under: 6. We find that the Tribunal in assessee's own case, vide a consolidated order dated 19.03.2014, has held as under:- 10.1. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was framed vide order dated 10/12/2010, thereby the AO disallowed the claim of the assessee made u/s.80IA(4) of the Act. Against this, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions of the assessee, rejected the appeal. 11. Ground Nos.1, 2 3 are inter-connected and, therefore, the same are decided together. 11.1. The l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee looses nothing. In fact its own allocation increases and it gains. Similarly, it doesn't get any benefit when it saves cost or is more efficient. In fact, the grants for the projects is not its revenue income at all. In fact, in various decisions the grants which are utilized for specified projects have been held to be not income but diversion of funds at source. The decisions include that of Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Gujarat Safai Kamdar Vikas Nigam vs. ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar (ITA No.3232/Ahd/2008, order dated 17/04/2009, and Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority vs. ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle,In the entirety of facts and circumstances, the appellant is doing the work of a concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two grounds of appeal are therefore, dismissed. 12.1. We find one of the objections of the ld.CIT(A) was that the assessee does not bear any risk and consequences arising from the project. In view of the ratio laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of Katira Construction Ltd. Union of India(supra), we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A), therefore ground Nos.1 to 3 of the assessee's appeal are rejected. 7. Facts being identical, respectfully following the precedent, we dismiss these additional grounds of appeal of the assessee. 5. There is no disparity of the facts, and therefore, following the order of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal (supra), we do not find any merit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
