Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, engaged in water transmission and related infrastructure activities, claimed deduction under Section 80IA. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated the activity as a works contract and denied the deduction. The AO also denied TDS credit, stating it would be granted in the year income was offered for taxation. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's additions.
Held
The Tribunal noted that no material was placed on record to controvert the findings of the lower authorities. In the absence of any rebuttal, the Tribunal upheld the orders of the AO and CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's infrastructure activity qualifies for deduction under Section 80IA, and the treatment of TDS credit by the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
80IA, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”, DELHI
(A.Y.2014-15) SMS SPML JV, Shop-2, Vardhman Grand Plaza, Plot No.7, Mangalam Place, Sec-7, ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant Rohini, New Delhi 110085 PAN: AAKAS-2557-B बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Circle-62(1), New Delhi Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 19/05/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 13/08/2025 आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 30.07.2018, for assessment year 2014-15.
The assessee filed instant appeal on 11.10.2018. The appeal was first listed for hearing on 22.11.2021. On the said date the assessee/appellant was represented by Shri Sajera Deora. At the oral request of assessee’s representative the appeal was adjourned to 09.02.2022. Thereafter, the appeal was adjourned (AY 2014-15) from time to time either at the request of assessee’s representative or on account of non appearance of assessee’s representative. Till 19th May 2025, the appeal was adjourned 17th times at the behest of assessee on one pretext or the other or non-appearance of assessee’s representative. A perusal of appeal file shows that on 20.07.2023 a written request for adjournment was received from assessee’s representative stating that the assessee is a Joint Venture entity of M/s. SMS Paryavaran Ltd. and SPML Infraprojects P. Ltd. M/s. SMS Paryavaran Ltd. was under liquidation process. Along with adjournment petition a copy of NCLT Principal Bench New Delhi order dated 21.02.2023 in IA No. 3878(PB)/2021, IN CP (IB) No. 1935(PB) 2019 in the matter of ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. SMS Paryavaran Ltd. was filed. Thereafter, till 05.11.2024 Counsel for the assessee appeared to seek adjournment. On 30.01.2025, 24.04.2025 & 19.05.2025 none appear to represent assessee. Notice sent through speed post to the assessee/appellant was received back from the postal authorities with remarks ‘left’. It seems that the assessee is not keen to prosecute the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is taken up for adjudication with the assistance of ld. DR and on the basis material already available on record.
Shri Manish Gupta, representing the department reiterated the findings of AO and vehemently defended impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee.
4. We have heard the submissions made by ld. DR and examined the orders of authorities below. A perusal of assessment order reveals that the assessee is engaged in the business of water transmission, treatment, storage and distribution, sewage system treatment, recycle, disposal and industrial affluent collection, treatment and disposal. The assessee claimed deduction u/s. 80IA of (AY 2014-15) the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The same was rejected by the Assessing Officer (AO) holding it to be works contract as against assessee’s claim of infrastructure activity. Further, the AO denied TDS credit to the assessee holding that credit of TDS will be granted in the assessment year in when such income will be offered to taxation. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 23.12.2016 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed appeal of the assessee and upheld both additions made by AO. Hence, present appeal.
No material has been placed on record before us controverting findings of the authorities below. In the absence of any material rebutting the additions made by AO and confirmed by the CIT(A), we see no reason to take a contrary view, hence, impugned order is upheld and appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 13th day of August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िद�ी/Delhi, �दनांक/Dated 13/08/2025 NV/- �ितिलिप अ�ेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to :
1. 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 2.