DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

| | | | आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण ायपीठ,मुंबई|
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“C” BENCH, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER
&
MS. PADMAVATHY S., HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No.4940/Mum/2024
Assessment Year: 2014-15

DCIT -1(2)1, Mumbai

Vs
Patil Construction and Infrastructure Ltd.
Flat No. 2, Swadhin Sadan
C-Road, Churchgate
Mumbai - 400021
[PAN: AAECM0806B]
अपीलाथ/ (Appellant)

त् यथ/ (Respondent)

I.T.A. No. 4942/Mum/2024
Assessment Year: 2015-16

DCIT -1(2)1, Mumbai

Vs
Patil Construction and Infrastructure Ltd.
Flat No. 2, Swadhin Sadan
C-Road, Churchgate
Mumbai - 400021
[PAN: AAECM0806B]
अपीलाथ/ (Appellant)
त् यथ/ (Respondent)

I.T.A. No. 4944/Mum/2024
Assessment Year: 2017-18

DCIT -1(2)1, Mumbai

Vs
Patil Construction and Infrastructure Ltd.
Flat No. 2, Swadhin Sadan
C-Road, Churchgate
Mumbai - 400021
[PAN: AAECM0806B]
अपीलाथ/ (Appellant)

त् यथ/ (Respondent)

Assessee by :
Mandar Vaidya
Revenue by :
Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R

सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 17/12/2024
घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 14/01/2025

आदेश/O R D E R

PER SANDEEP GOSA

The present against the sepa even dated 22/
pertaining to AYs
2. Since all the are common and clubbed, heard t passed for the sa take up ITA No.
case and facts na the following grou
1. "Whether o and in law th deduction
Rs.4,40,47,96
2. "Whether o and in law th assessee has claiming dedu
3. "Whether o and in law assessee was rehabilitation widening' any any work of maintaining t
4. "Whether o and in law th assessee upo been paid the I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
2
AIN, JM:
t appeals by the revenue a arate orders passed by the N
/07/2024 [hereinafter ‘the 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18
e issues involved in these thr d identical, therefore, they ogether and consolidated orde ake of convenience and brevity
4940/Mum/2024, A.Y 2014- arrated therein. The assessee unds of appeal:
n the facts and in the circumstance he Ld.CIT(A) was justified in allow u/s.801A of the Act amo
69/-."
n the facts and in the circumstance e Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the s not fulfilled the conditions lai uction u/s.801A of the Act."
n the facts and in the circumstance the Ld.CIT(A) failed to apprecia s involved in carrying out work in t whereas there is no reference to th ywhere in work order and has not development of new infrastructur he same."
n the facts and in the circumstance e Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the on completion of the contractual obl e agreed contract price as per wor

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
re preferred
NFAC, Delhi, ld. CIT(A)’]
.
ee appeals have been er is being
. We shall 15 as lead has raised s of the case wing claim of ounting to s of the case fact that the d down for s of the case ate that the the nature of he term 'road t carried out re facility or s of the case fact that the ligations has rk completed whereas se maintenance
5. "Whether o and in law th relationship b the contracto acted as a co its principals principals wh
6. "Whether o was justified additional ev the agreeme
Government o statutory bod authority or a developing o operating an without follow of the I.T. Rul
7. "The Appe above ground
Mumbai be re
8. "The Appel or add a new
3. There is a de the revenue. Aft filed by the reve parties on this revenue was prev appeals in time.
laid down by Hon
Acquisition Coll
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
3
ection
801A stipulates devel of infrastructure facility."
n the facts and in the circumstance e Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the between assessee and the governme or and the contractee and the as ontractor only on a specific contrac
, cost of which has been reimburs ho are the actual owner/developer?"
on the facts of case and in law, t to allow the assessee's appeal by vidences such as Form No.10CCB ent of the enterprises with t or a State Government or a local au y for carrying on the tate Governme a statutory body for carrying on the or operating and maintaining or nd maintaining a new infrastruc wing the statutory procedure includi les in this respect."
llant prays that the order of the C d be set aside and that of the estored."
lant craves leave to amend or alter ground which may necessary. "
elay of 4 days in filing of thes er perusing the petition for enue dated 24/09/2024 and application, we are convinc vented by ‘sufficient cause’ fro
Therefore, keeping in view th n’ble Supreme Court in the ca lector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors.,

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
lopment or s of the case fact that the ent is that of ssessee has ct allotted by sed from the "
he Ld.CIT(A) y considering and copy of the Central uthority or a ent or a local e business of developing, ture facility ing Rule 46A
CIT(A) on the ACIT-1(2)(1), any grounds e appeals by condonation hearing the ed that the om filing the he principles ase of Land
, [1987] AIR

1353 (SC), we con admitted for hear

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
e appeals are nt are inter- allenging the of deduction re, we have way of this department re us and . It was n allowing
Act as the d down for d upon the terated the CIT(A) and he Hon’ble rred to as d upon the assessee’s
303 and e decisions

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
22 ITR 323
IT, ITA No.
Developers
Bom)
[2024] 161
parties and on record, sed by the e assessee ion of civil year under d declaring claiming
0,47,969/-.
ssessee by e assessee elopment of and that ‘
e classified e of section lowance of venue that the department h allowing deductio
10. In order to submitted that a road widening a therefore the a contractor, as t company is co infrastructure an material and is b the agencies of an 11. Apart the as in question has b and it has been d by constructing a project by an un infrastructure f of the Act.
12. Even otherw containing detail which contains F
ITR-V and the c passed u/s 245D
13. We noticed deduction u/s 8
153A of the Act
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
6
has filed appeal against the ord on u/s 80IA(4)(i) of the Act.
o support their contentions ssessee has carried out the co and renovation of existing assessee cannot be termed the work that is being don onstruction and of mainta nd for that assessee has to pu bearing the risk by way of ind ny defect in the construction o sessee has also submitted tha been thoroughly examined by decided that widening of an exi additional lanes as a part of ndertaking would be regarded facility’ for the purpose of Sec wise assessee has filed pa ls of work orders of eligible
Form No. 10CCB, Financial S computation of total income
(4) dated 19.03.2015. that assessee has already
0IA of the Act in its returns and had filed applications b

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
der of ITSC s, Ld. AR ontracts of road and as work ne by the aining the rchase the demnifying f road.
t the issue the Board isting road a highway d as ‘new c. 80IA(4)(i) aper book e projects, tatements, and order y claimed s filed u/s efore ITSC u/s 245D of the said applications dated 19.03.2015
14. Before Hon’
eligibility for clai
Act, to which Ld the objections vi identical to the g the department.
in the present raised by the dep reproduced herein iv. It is stated infrastructure explanation in that the deduc works contrac contractor and fulfilled.
v. As per the projects. Even allowable for n of the existing covered in the they satisfy th
15. Hence in thi to evaluate the objections were ITSC dealt with t factual as well as I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
7
Act for A.Y: 2006-07 to 2012
were disposed off by ITSC vid
5. ble ITSC, assessee had con iming the deduction u/s 80IA( d. CIT in his report under Rul is-à-vis merits of the claim, grounds raised in the present
Therefore in this way the grou appeal are identical to the partment before ITSC and the n below:
that there is difference between de facility and executing a works c ntroduced in 2007 w.e.f. 01.04.20
ction is not available in the case of ct'. Since the applicant was on d not a developer, the impugned con
CBDT circular, deduction is to t n in respect of the Highway pro new roads or creation of new lanes g roads. Relaying of the existing ro e scheme. The applicants have not his condition.
s scenario it has become more e orders of ITSC wherein raised by the department an the same after thoroughly exam s legal propositions.

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
2-13. The de its order tended its (4)(i) of the le 9 raised which are appeal by unds raised objections e same are eveloping an ontrast. The 000 clarifies execution of ly a works ndition is not the Highway ojects, it is by widening oads are not proved that important identical nd Hon’ble mining the 16. We noticed objections of th evidences before are recorded by IT same is reproduc
(i) The applic provisions of form, the ass activities of infrastructure.
carrying on th and operating infrastructure f

(ii) The applic infrastructur the Section a including toll r project includin part of the high

(iii) They have the word 'dev some area of 'cause to grow,

(iv) The applic no 3 of 2008 d person makes development w he will be elig to this, a per person includin to in section 8
be eligible for t
17. Further in ‘developer’, it I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
8
the assessee in order to me he department had filed do
ITSC and raised the contenti
TSC in its order in para No. 35
ed below:
cants have first analyzed the his section 801A and stated that in essee need not be engaged in a developing, maintaining and op
It is enough if it is he business of either developing or or developing, maintaining; and o facility'
cants have then dealt with the m e facility' as envisaged in the Ex and highlighted that it will inclu rood', a bridge or a rail system' and ng housing or other activities being hway project"
e then dealt with the Dictionary elop’' and stated that it includes 'a land or water more profitable or , to elaborate or expand in detail', cants have then relied upon the CB dated 12.3.2008 according to whic s the investment and himself e work 'i.e. carries out the civil constr ible for tax benefit under sec 80IA'
rson who enters into a contract w ng Govt or on undertaking or enterp
801A for executing the works contr the tax benefit u/s 801A"
order to support that asse was argued that assessee

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
et out the cumentary ions which 5.3 and the story of the the present all the three perating the maintaining operating the meaning of '
xplanation of ude 'a rood d 'a highway g an integral meaning of act of making r useful/ or BDT Circular ch " where a executes the ruction work,
'. In contrast with another prise referred ract, will not essee was being the company has me deduction and th and ‘widening o
‘infrastructure f as per Circular was also conten claimed on the e been claimed on wherein they infrastructure fa conditions as to and handing over skills as laid dow
Taxmann.com 3
and inthis regard of extracts of few
18. In order to f as to how asse assessee filed
Corporation regar contracts. It w
Hon’ble ITSE, th was developer furnished for t department in t assesee is contain
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
9
t out the basic requirement fo he activities of construction o of the roads’ have been clar facility’. For the deduction
No.4 OF 2010 Dt. 18th May, nded that the deduction has entire turnover, but the dedu nly with reference to those can be called developers acility. It was vehemently ar the purchase of material, ta r of sites, risk of contract' exp wn in the case of Koya & Co
35 (Hyd.) are satisfied by the d our attention was dwawn to contacts as were filed as illus further substantiate in his e ssee was a developer, in th certificate from the Pune rding the contracts and also s as further submitted that ev he assessee had explained as and detailed explanation the ambiguities pointed ou he contracts. The explanati ned in the paper book at page

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
or claiming of the road ified to be u/s. 80-IA
, 2010. It not been uction has contracts s of the rgued that aking over pertise and (2012) 21
e assessee the copies trations.
xplanation his regard
Municipal some other ven before to how it was also ut by the ion of the No. 107 to 112 at para 35.4
below:
35.4 In the cou reiterated, its the case of the respect of the the departmen should prove their activities contractor. The the details of fulfill the requi
35.5 At the ti first claborate relating to the 801A (i) first t
153A on the b under Section reference to th various decisio
He then expla be treated as works-contract
Corporation re mention the co mention that th is part of th
Development; t by the Corpor
60/30 months
Machinery and reference to th the contract d referred to pa wherein the ex
" widening to Janakpur Bala
The defect liab
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
10
4 to 36.1 and the same is r urse of hearing on 06.02.2015, the stand as to the first three legal de e applicants summarized in para 35
e remaining two conditions mentio nt expressed its desire that the with reference to the individual co s were that of a Developer and not e Bench theri asked the applicant f the individual contracts and sho irements of being a Developer.
me of hearing on 23.02.2015, the ed his stand with regard to the e allowability of the deduction un time claimed in the returns filed u book-profits and (ii) claimed in the 153A on the additional income co he seized papers. He dealt at leng ons of the ITAT, as mentioned above ined as to how the impugned cont development - contract as distin t. He filed certificates from the Pun egarding 11 (The contracts/ The ontract amount and nature of work he works pertained to the road wide he Highway Road Project and In that the Construction material was ration; that the defect liability p s and that the Company employ d Technical Staff for execution of the he other contracts, the learned AR documents. As an illustration, the age 51 of the Paper Book filed on xtracts from the contract relating to o two lane in Km.0 to 50 of angi Road (SH-3)" in Chhattisgarh bility period is mentioned as 36 m

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
reproduced e Department eficiencies in 5.2 above. In ned therein, e applicants ontracts that t of a works ts to furnish w that they learned AR legal issues nder Section nder Section returns filed mputed with gth with the e.
racts should nct from the ne Municipal certificates k. They also ening, which nfrastructure not supplied period is for yed its own e work. With relied upon learned AR
06.02.2015, o the work of Widrafnagar h are given.
months which means that fo contract, the r mentions the m years' experien
3
Mechanica experience. It be deployed on 21 gives the d the use of exp the execution o
35.6 In the co first reiterated either in resp
Charchit Agra
CIT(2012) 20
Thereafter, th
Assessment
Infrastructure contracts from and, as per t ongoing contra by the Compan the additional claimed the de from the de additional inco in the ratio of the hearing, t respect of the f a) 'Improvemen
Ring Road":
It is not clear w b) 'Widening of (SH-3) Chhattis
Contract does c) 'Improvemen
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
11
or that much period after the exec risk remained with the applicants.
minimum deployment of 1 Civil En nce, 1 Civil Engineer of 3 years' exp l
Engineers/Diploma holders o
2011-12,
M/S
Patil
Cons
P Ltd took over the running busin the proprietary concern, M/S Patil the notes on accounts, the receip acts of the said proprietary Concern ny in its receipts. It was further poin l income on which the two appl eduction, it cannot be said to have b evelopment of infrastructure, b ome has been arrived at by allocat the turnover. The A.O., who was pr then pointed out some specific am following contracts:
nt of road from Gulbarga Railway S whether it is new road or old road.
f lane of Widraf Nagar Janakpur B sgarh:
not give name of Patil Group Compa nt of No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
&
ness of road
Construction pts from the were shown nted out that licants have been derived ecause the ing the peak resent during mbiguities in tation to join
Balangi Road any.

It is not clear details not give d) Widening
Chaibasa:
Only letter as papers) is sub given to M/S P business had 01.04.2010. e)
Widening
Bejurapalli- P
Aheri-Allapalli
Only letter dat
(and not all pa much work is d f) Projects done
The eleven ce work as "impro
35.7 In the rep i. No deductio
Patil Construc
Patil Construc were received given to clarify ii. It has been main entities
Govt. Agencies formed on acco entities, which income was ou
35.8 In respec for the individu a)The applican
Govt. agencies
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
12
whether it is new road or old roa en.
of two lane and improvement,N sking to proceed with the work ( bmitted It is not clear why the C
Patil construction in Sept 2010 eve already been taken over by the com to intermediate lane and impr arsewadi -Moybinpetta- Venkatpu
Road(SH-25): PWD Nagpur:
ted 01.01.2011 asking to proceed w apers) is submitted. It is not know done during three months ending 31
e by PMC:
rtificates filed by the applicants ovement of roads".
ply, it was stated that n has been claimed on the work d tion. Since the original bid was m tion, the contracts were awarded a in that name. The note in accoun y it.
mentioned in the SOF that receipts were from the road contract awa s and that peak of 'MB Patil-BB Pa ount of bogus billing resorted by th h Deaves no doubt that impugned ut of the development of infrastructu ct of the deficiencies in the informat ual contracts, it has been further cla nts have filed a certificate from th s certifying that the contract wa

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
ad. Financial
NH Division
(and not all Contract was en though its mpany w.e.f.
rovement to r- Deolmari- with the work wn as to how
1.03.2011. describe the done by M/S made by M/S and cheques nts is merely s of the three rded by the atil' a/c was e three main d additional ure facilities.
tion supplied arified that:
he concerned as for road widening and no materials w period was for b) The applica
Govt. agencies widening and no materials w period was for of the applican c)The applican details of the c
Contract Docum carriageways construction o details of the The bid amoun given which is details are be Govt. Agencies of the contract d) The applica
Patil Construct firm was conve mentioned on work done an deduction unde e) Only nomina in the books up
Rs.24.49 Crore deduction unde
In the lower p that the work c
36. DECISION
We have caref
CIT(DR) and t issue. We have upon by both
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
13
was a part of the National Highway were supplied to the contractor and r 18 months.
ants have filed a certificate from th s certifying that the contract wa was a part of the National Highway were supplied to the contractor and r 18 months and the contract was nt.
nts vide their reply dated 06.02.201
contract and as mentioned in claus ment, the work consists of 'widenin and strengthening including cambe of new road/ parallel service la work will be clear from the drawin nt of Rs.62.38 Crores is the value of s the agreed amount of the work g eing filed in the certificate from th s as required including the defect lia
.
ants have submitted that the bid w tion much before 01.04.2010, the d erted into a company so the name o the letter filed. A certificate with re nd other criterion as required for er Section 801A(4) have been filed.
al turnover of Rs.1,73,40462/- has p to 31.03.2011 as against the cont es and profit of Rs.7,95,669/- was er Section 801A(4).
ortion of the certificates it is clearl consists of widening of roads.
fully considered the submissions m he learned AR of the applicants o e also taken note of the various dec the parties in respect of the all No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
y Project and d the liability he concerned as for road y project and d the liability in the name
5 have given se 9(A) of the ng of existing er correction; ne". Further ngs attached.
f the contract iven. All the he concerned ability period was made by ate w.e.f the of the firm is espect to the the claim of been shown tract value of s claimed as ly mentioned made by the on the above cisions relied lowability or otherwise of th statutory prov the legal is pronouncemen the factual a applicants, in 801A has been the applican admissibility o
We would also upon the decis
Sun Engineer judgement was the Act and it under Section "153A.
[(1)] Notwiths section 147, se
153, in the cas section 132 o assets are req of May, 2003,
(a) Issue notice such period, a income in resp assessment ye form and verif such other p provisions of accordingly as furnished unde
(b) Assess or years immedia the previous requisition is m
36.1 It is ve provisions tha notice issued u
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
14
he deduction under Section 801A of visions, the circulars issued by the ssues arising from the vario ts have also been examined with aspects of the contracts carried respect of which the deduction un n claimed. We are of the considered nts have satisfactorily estab of the above deduction on the facts o o like to observe that the departme sion of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ing is apparently misplaced, as s rendered in the context of Section cannot be applied to the provision
153A of the Act, as reproduced here tanding anything contained in s ection 148, section 149, section 151
se of a person where a search is ini or books of account, other docum uisitioned under section 132A after the Assessing Officer shall- e to such person requiring him to fu as may be specified in the notice, t pect of each assessment year fallin ears referred to in clause (b), in th fied in the prescribed manner and particulars as maybe prescribe this Act shall, so far as may s if such return were a return req er section 139; reassess the total income of six ately preceding the assessment yea year in which such search is c made:"
ry clear from a bare reading of at the return of income filed in resp u/s 153A is required to be treated

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
f the Act. The e CBDT and ous judicial reference to out by the nder Section opinion that lished the of the cases.
ent's reliance n the case of s the above n 147/148 of ns contained eunder:- section 139,
1 and section itiated under ents or any r the 31 day urnish within the return of ng within six he prescribed setting forth d and the y be, apply quired to be assessment ar relevant to onducted or f the above ponse to the d as a return filed u/s 139
requiring asse the case may claim in the sa in the original
A.O. is also e reassessment assessee is req wherever laid cases, there h applicants. Fu enhanced cla undisclosed in and/or the ad the settlement learned AR tha u/s 801A of th
Further, it has been made in facie not eligib hold that the 801A of the A applicable. Acc
19. From the ab the assessee was evaluated the ce amount and nat
‘pertained to th
Highway Road P
The Construction
Corporation (Gov that the defect li that the Comp
Machinery and work.
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
15
9 of the Act. It is altogether a f ssment or reassessment of the tota be. The assessee is entitled to m aid return, which might not have b return filed u/s 139 of the Act. S entitled to reexamine the issues a in respect of such return. Ho quired to comply with the necessary down, in support of its claim. In has been no such failure on the rther, the assessee is also entitled im for such deduction, in resp ncome shown in the return filed dditional income offered/computed i application filed. It has been subm at the applicants have made claim f he Act in respect of the eligible con s been clarified that the above cl respect of the works contract, whic ble for the same. Under the circum applicants are entitled to claim de
Act for the years under settlemen cordingly, the above issue gets settl bove order we can safely con s a developer and in this regar rtificates which mentioned th ture of the work and that he road widening’ which is p
Project and Infrastructure Dev n material was not supplie vt. Body) but was that of the iability period is for 60/30 m pany
(assessee) employed
Technical Staff for executi

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
fresh return, al income, as make a fresh been claimed
Similarly, the and make a owever, the y conditions, the present part of the d to make an pect of the d u/s 153A in respect of mitted by the for deduction ntracts only.
aim has not ch are prima- mstances, we eduction u/s nt, wherever led clude that rd we have he contract the works part of the velopment.
ed by the e assessee, months and its own ion of the 20. With referen assessee produce the work of "wi
Widrafınagar
Ja
Chhattisgarh.
E mentioned as 36
period after the remained with th assessee for a mi
10 years' exper experience, and 3
of specified exper of 15 plant and along with their the assessee use in the execution o

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
tracts, the relating to 0 to 50 of SH-3)"
in period is that much t the risk ndated the Engineer of f
3 years'
ma holders gave a list n the work ished that nical skills, were dealt such as a government for road way Project tor and the gs & other of widening including camber correctio service lane.
22. The Hon’ble facts have rende below:
We have car
CIT(DR) and issue. We ha relied upon b or otherwise
The statutory and the leg pronouncemen the factual a applicants, in 801A has be that the app admissibility cases. We wo reliance upon the case of S above judgem
147/148 of th contained un hereunder:-

"153A.

[(1)] Notwiths section 147, section 153, initiated und documents or 132A after th shall-

(a) Issue not within such p
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
17
ons, construction of new roa
ITSC after detailed evaluation ered the decision which is r efully considered the submissions the learned AR of the applicants o ave also taken note of the variou y both the parties in respect of the of the deduction under Section 801A y provisions, the circulars issued b al issues arising from the vari nts have also been examined with aspects of the contracts carried n respect of which the deduction u en claimed. We are of the conside plicants have satisfactorily esta of the above deduction on the f ould also like to observe that the d n the decision of the Hon'ble Supre un Engineering is apparently mispl ment was rendered in the contex he Act and it cannot be applied to th nder Section 153A of the Act, as standing anything contained in s section 148, section 149, sectio in the case of a person where der section 132 or books of acc r any assets are requisitioned un he 31 day of May, 2003, the Asses tice to such person requiring him period, as may be specified in the No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
ad/parallel n of all the reproduced made by the on the above us decisions allowability
A of the Act.
by the CBDT ous judicial reference to out by the nder Section ered opinion ablished the facts of the department's eme Court in laced, as the xt of Section he provisions reproduced section 139, on 151 and a search is count, other nder section ssing Officer m to furnish e notice, the return of inco within six ass prescribed fo setting forth s the provision accordingly a furnished und

(b) Assess or years immedi to the previou requisition is 36.1 It is ve provision tha notice issued filed u/s 139
requiring asse the case may claim in the s in the origina
A.O. is also reassessment assessee is conditions, w the present ca of the applica make an enh the undisclos and/or the ad the settlemen learned AR deduction u/
contracts only claim has no which are pr circumstances claim deducti settlement, w issue gets set

I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
18
ome in respect of each assessment sessment years referred to in claus rm and verified in the prescribed such other particulars as maybe pre s of this Act shall, so far as ma as if such return were a return re der section 139; r reassess the total income of six iately preceding the assessment y us year in which such search is c made:"
ery clear from a bare reading of t the return of income filed in resp u/s 153A is required to be treated
9 of the Act. It is altogether a f essment or reassessment of the tota y be. The assessee is entitled to m said return, which might not have b al return filed u/s 139 of the Act. S entitled to reexamine the issues a t in respect of such return. H required to comply with the wherever laid down, in support of ases, there has been no such failure ants. Further, the assessee is als hanced claim for such deduction, i sed income shown in the return file dditional income offered/computed nt application filed. It has been subm that the applicants have made s 801A of the Act in respect of y. Further, it has been clarified tha t been made in respect of the wor rima-facie not eligible for the same s, we hold that the applicants are ion u/s 801A of the Act for the wherever applicable. Accordingly, ttled.

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
year falling se (b), in the manner and escribed and ay be, apply quired to be assessment year relevant conducted or f the above ponse to the d as a return fresh return, al income, as make a fresh been claimed
Similarly, the and make a owever, the e necessary its claim. In e on the part o entitled to in respect of ed u/s 153A in respect of mitted by the e claim for the eligible at the above rks contract, e. Under the e entitled to years under the above

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
er of ITSC also reach
'developer'
sessee has s' and has as entered one of the A(4) and in o Finance s that the stment in ndum also a contract ut work, is herefore in not a mere e Act. For sion in the /Kol/2015, also, "works he contractor erial from a abour of the contract". We f Associated
R 435 while had held that means any rk and is not intended to be therefore, a pe contractor any specified in se work (including liable to dedu section. The w
`on income com words `deduct as income-tax the percentage contractor out him in pursuan out of paymen curtail or to cu the section. "A contract", whic
Indeed in the expressly inclu a clear indica sub-section is "works contrac in the aforesa section 194C n
Hon'ble Apex section 194C n labour contrac supply of labo implied that w out work. Thu contract consti merely employ the contractee complete infras to the contrac material turns further that th
Finance Bill, 2
page 312 read

"Section 80-1A to an enterpris
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
20
e confined to or restricted to wor erson who credits to the account of y sum payable on behalf of o ection 194C(1) of the Act for carry g supply of labour for carrying out uct income-tax as required unde words in the sub-section (1) of 194
mprised therein' appearing immediat t an amount equal to two per cent
' from their purport, cannot be un e amount deductible from the inc of the sum credited to his accoun nce of the contract, but deduction is ts made to the contractor. We see ut down the meaning of the plain w
Any work" means any work and n ch has a special connotation in t e subsection, the "work" referred udes supply of labour to carry out ation of the Legislature that the "w not intended to be confined to or ct". The issue before the Hon'ble Su aid case was whether the term "wo needs to be restricted to "works co
Court laid out that the term "wo need not be restricted to "works co cts) because the subsection expres our to carry out work. In other works contract means supply of lab us from the above we may say th itutes a contract under which the ing his efforts or labour. Under suc provides the material and other r structure) needed to carry out the d ctor who by applying his labour s the material into a desired produ e memorandum explaining the prov
2007, reported in (2007) 289 ITR s as under:
A, inter alia, provides for a ten-yea se or an undertaking engaged in de

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
rks contract, or pays to a organizations ying out any any work) is er that sub-
C of the Act tely after the of such sum nderstood as come of the nt or paid to s to be made no reason to ords used in not a "works the tax law.
d to therein a work. It is work" in the restricted to upreme Court ork" used in ontract". The ork" used in ontracts" (i.e.
ssly includes words, it is bour to carry hat a works contractor is h a contract, requisites (a desired work to the said uct. We find visions in the (St.) 292 at r tax benefit velopment of infrastructure f zones. The tax industrial mod qualitative imp highways, air systems) whic the tax benefi sector particip the infrastruct execute the c contract."

Accordingly, it section 80- IA works contract referred to in t makes the inv work, i.e., car eligible for tax contrast to thi with another p to in section 8
eligible for tax

This amendme
2000 and will year 2000-01 a The Explanato of extending investments fro i.e. contracts construction w purview of the "works contra means a con employing labo

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
cial economic reason that nsion of, and xpressways, ail transport e purpose of aging private velopment of who merely other works provisions of o executes a or enterprise here a person development k he will be f the Act. In o a contract rise referred
, will not be om 1st April e assessment that purpose o encourage rk contracts, execution of outside the us, the term on 80-IA(13) e by merely of the Act ssee could

(i) develop;
(ii) operate
(iii) develop

Therefore, any on for the deduction the activities and CIT v. ABG Heav

Section 80-IA o gains from in 1997-98 to 20
section 80-IA i or (ii) operates operates that amendment to conditions of d not intended to was awarded cranes at Jaw policy of Gove participation in assessee was commissioning envisaged two assessee wou equipment, wh carry out opera out by assesse equipment ava days as stipula liquidated dam commissioning assessee was cost Whether, carried on bus
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
22
or and maintain ; or , operate and maintain the f ne of the above activities wou n and it is not necessary to ca d in this regard we rely upon t vy Industries Ltd 322 ITR 323
of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Deductio nfrastructure undertakings- Asses
000-01 and 2005-06-Whether dedu is available to an enterprise which and maintains; or (iii) develops, ma infrastructure facility inasmuch as section 80-1A(4) has made it clea development, operation and mainte o be cumulative in nature Held, yes a contract for leasing of contain waharlal Nehru Port Trust ('JNPT') ernment of India to encourage pr n development of infrastructure Und responsible for supplying, installat and maintenance of cranes o different options, first being one uld carry out operation and mai hile second consisted of an option ations and only maintenance was t ee - Assessee assumed responsibili ailable for operation for a minimum ated in contract and would become mages for non-availability of equi
- After expiry of lease period of liable to hand over equipment to J on facts, it could be said that as siness of developing, maintaining an No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
facility.
uld qualify arry out all the case of 3 (Bom), on Profit and ssment year uction under (i) develops; aintains and s subsequent ar that three enance were s - Assessee ner handling in terms of rivate sector der contract, tion, testing,
-
Contract under which intenance of n to JNPT to to be carried ty of making m number of liable to pay ipment after f ten years,
JNPT free of ssessee had nd operating an infrastructu under section 8

In this Regard it merely developin entitled to deduct section 80- IA(4) an agreement wit
IA grants deduc development, car with the Governm earn profits fro
Govt/Govt. Bodie eligible for the de
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
23
ural facility so as to entitle it to 80-IA - Held, yes to the AO's contention that a orming cumulatively all the a order to claim the deduction, i ntenable.
in hand, it appears that o evailed upon the Ld. AO to ere contractor, is that the ass e idea of developing infrastruc ment which had conceived i rely carried out/executed the g to the AO, the assessee t was submitted that if an a ng the infrastructural facil tion u/s 80- 1A. Further, cond stipulates that an assessee e th the Government. Hence, if s ction on profits from the a rried out in pursuance of an ment, it presupposes that ass om the amounts it is pai es and it is such profits which eduction.

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
a deduction n assessee above three s therefore one of the o hold the sessee had ture but it it and the same. And was mere assessee is lity, it is dition (b) of enters into section 80- activity of agreement sessee will d by the h would be 27. And in case, ground that the agreement with received paymen eventuality an a never be entitled view, merely be Government for deduction under an assessee can ground that the idea of infrastru contract with the Govt. is a sine q
80-IA(4) in this r
Adhunik Infras and the same vie
Bench of the Contractors Pro
[2018] 93 Taxm decision of the H
Montecarlo
C
Taxmann.com 2
assessee
28. Thus we are contracts, nature
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
24
, deduction u/s 80-IA is declin assessee had merely entere the Govt. and/or the asse nts from Government, then ssessee who is only a "deve to deduction u/s 80-IA. There cause the assessee was pa development work, it cannot section 80- IA(4) of the Act.
nnot be declined the deductio assessee has not himself con ucture but has merely enter e Govt.; entering into a contrac qua non for claiming the dedu regard we rely upon the decis structure ITA/1281/Kol/201
ew was also adopted by the C
Tribunal in the case of operty & Land Developers mann.com 296 (Mum.), even
Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Construction
Ltd.
[202
222 (Guj.) also supports the c e of the view that the facts, e of works in the present years

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
ned on the ed into an essee had n in that loper" will fore in our id by the be denied
Similarly, on on the nceived the red into a ct with the uction u/s.
sion in the 5 (supra)
Coordinate
Bhinmal s P. Ltd.
the recent
PCIT V/s.
24]
161
case of the nature of are ‘same

& identical’ to the eligibility of t
IA of the Act is assessee, by th assessee's own ca
29. It is also im for A.Y 2018-19
80IA of the Act appeal before technical issue.

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
ITSC. And on u/s. 80- our of the SC in the at the CIT(A) nder section ad preferred ismissed on not brought e Settlement of the CIT(A) assessee for Act and thus, ars, i.e., A.Y sturbed and of the Act facts and d discussed placed before ed by the ld.
e facts and no reason to interfere into or t so recorded by th
CIT(A) is upheld.

ITA Nos. 4942
2017-18
32. As the facts identical to ITA N
(except variance above paragraph appeals also. Acc revenue are dism
33. In the result are dismissed.

Order pronounced in (PADMAVA
ACCOUNTAN

Mumbai, Dated 14/01/2025
*SC SrPs
SC SrPs
SC SrPs
SC SrPs

I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
26
to deviated from the well-reaso he ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the ord
& 4944/Mum/2024, A.Y:
and circumstances in these ap
No 4940/Mum/2024 for the A.
in figures) and the decision r would apply mutatis mutandi cordingly, the grounds of appe issed.
t, all the three appeals filed by n the Court on 14th January, 2025 at Mu

ATHY S.)
(SANDE
NTMEMBER

JUDIC

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024
oned findings der of the ld.
2015-16 &
ppeals are .Y 2014-15
endered in s for these eal of the y the revenue umbai. EEP GOSAIN)
IAL MEMBER

आदेशकीितिलिपअेिषत/Copy of th
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2.  थ / The Respondent
3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु"/ Co
4. आयकरआयु"
)
अपील
(
/
5. िवभागीयितिनिध ,आयकरअ
6. गाड&फाई/Guard file.

I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
I.T.A. N
27
he Order forwarded to :

oncerned Pr. CIT
/ The CIT(A)-
अपीलीयअिधकरण,मुंबई/DR,ITAT, Mumbai,
आदे
आय

No. 4940/Mum/2024
No. 4942/Mum/2024
No. 4944/Mum/2024

देशानुसार/ BY ORDER,