ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS 2 1, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal considered the agreements and amendments, noting that the assessee was solely responsible for execution and the other JV member was to receive a fixed fee. The Tribunal also discussed the applicability of Section 80-IA(4) and relied on Bombay High Court's decision that the conditions for development, operation, and maintenance are not cumulative.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the assessee's failure to deduct TDS on interest paid to a Joint Venture (JV). The AO held that the JV was a separate entity (AOP) and the assessee was liable for TDS, while the CIT(A) allowed the appeal relying on CBDT circulars and High Court judgments.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was liable to deduct TDS on interest paid to the JV, and whether the assessee was eligible for deduction under Section 80-IA(4) for infrastructure development.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 194A,Section 201(1),Section 201(1A),Section 80-IA(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Katira Construction Ltd. v. UOI77 citing31 Taxmann.com 250 · 2013 · HC
- CIT v. SMSL-UANRCL11 citing372 ITR 429 · 2015 · HC
- 323 ITR 3226 citing323 ITR 322
- CIT v. Smsl Uanrcl(JV)6 citing378 ITR 429
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
Heard together (6 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): ITA NOs. 3068/Mum/2024 & 3065/Mum/2024 The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the Revenue against
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 194A
- S R P Jutha 13 Rajkot VI and Gr S Ma, Rajkot vs ITO WD 1(2)(1) Rajkot, RajkotITA 951/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Welspun Aunta Simaria Project Private… vs DCIT, Circle-78(1), DelhiITA 6559/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Lakhmanbhai Maru, Vadodara vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(1), Vadodara, Aayakar…ITA 1046/AHD/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
- Hexad Infosoft Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…ITA 1713/BANG/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Hexad Infosoft Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…ITA 1712/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
