ACIT v. Bharat Udyog Ltd.

118 ITD 336Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#2107 most cited

What is ACIT v. Bharat Udyog Ltd. authority for?

An assessee engaged in the development of infrastructure facilities is eligible for deduction under section 80-IA, even if referred to as a contractor or if basic specifications are provided in the agreement. The determination hinges on the scope of work, responsibilities, and risks undertaken as a developer.

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

ACIT v Bharat Udyog Ltd. · section 80-IA · infrastructure facility · developer vs contractor · deduction eligibility · scope of work · responsibilities · risks

Also reported as

24 SOT 412123 TTJ 68923 DTR 433

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(13)section 80ia(4)(i)section 80lasection 86section 33bsection 80ib(4)section 80lsection 167bsection 167resulting companysection 80ia(4)infrastructure facility

Judgments citing ACIT v. Bharat Udyog Ltd.

Porel Dass Water & Effluent Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 1(4)/ Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2402/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Porel Dass Water & Effluent Vs. ITO, Ward-13(3), Kolkata Poddar Court, 4th Floor, 18, Rabindra Howrah Industrial-cum-Commercial Complex, 24, Belillious Road, 2nd Sarani, Kolkata-700001. Floor, Howrah-711101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAFCP 0496 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2402/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Porel Dass Water & Effluent Vs. ITO, Ward-13(3), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan, 7th Floor, P…

Porel Dass Water & Effluent Control Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, WD-13(3), Kolkata, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 1354/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Porel Dass Water & Effluent Vs. ITO, Ward-13(3), Kolkata Poddar Court, 4th Floor, 18, Rabindra Howrah Industrial-cum-Commercial Complex, 24, Belillious Road, 2nd Sarani, Kolkata-700001. Floor, Howrah-711101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAFCP 0496 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2402/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Porel Dass Water & Effluent Vs. ITO, Ward-13(3), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan, 7th Floor, P…

ACIT, Circle-12(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Simplex Infrastructure Ltd., Kolkata

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1765/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [PAN : AAECS 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12(2) Kolkata……...........................………

ACIT, Circle-12(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Simplex Infrastructure Ltd., Kolkata

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1764/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [PAN : AAECS 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12(2) Kolkata……...........................………

M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 12, Kolkata

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1573/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [PAN : AAECS 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12(2) Kolkata……...........................………

M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 12, Kolkata

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1572/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [PAN : AAECS 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-12(2) Kolkata……...........................………

Welspun Projects Ltd.(Formerly Known As Msk Projects (India) Ltd.), Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Range-4, Baroda

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…various decided cases as under: (1) CIT vs. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd., 322 ITR 323 (Bom.) (2) Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. DCIT, 84 TTJ 646 (Mum.) (3) DCIT vs. Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats (P) Ltd, 22 SOT 259 (Del.) (4) ACIT vs. Bharat Udyog Ltd., 123 TTJ 689 (Mum.) (5) Koya & Co. Construction P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 51 SOT 203 (Hyd.) (6) Om Metal Infra Projects Ltd. vs. CIT, 26 DTR 359 (Jaipur) (7) Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO, 79 ITD 213 (Indore) (8) Chetak Enterprises P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 95 ITD 1 (Jodhpur) (9) Ocean Sparkle Ltd. vs. DCIT, 99 TTJ 582 (Hyd.) 2.8 Various relevant issues have been cons…

Welspun Projects Ltd.(Formerly Known As Msk Projects (India) Ltd.), Baroda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Baroda

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1864/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…various decided cases as under: (1) CIT vs. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd., 322 ITR 323 (Bom.) (2) Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. DCIT, 84 TTJ 646 (Mum.) (3) DCIT vs. Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats (P) Ltd, 22 SOT 259 (Del.) (4) ACIT vs. Bharat Udyog Ltd., 123 TTJ 689 (Mum.) (5) Koya & Co. Construction P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 51 SOT 203 (Hyd.) (6) Om Metal Infra Projects Ltd. vs. CIT, 26 DTR 359 (Jaipur) (7) Ayush Ajay Construction Ltd. vs. ITO, 79 ITD 213 (Indore) (8) Chetak Enterprises P. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 95 ITD 1 (Jodhpur) (9) Ocean Sparkle Ltd. vs. DCIT, 99 TTJ 582 (Hyd.) 2.8 Various relevant issues have been cons…

M/S Adhunik Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, RG-10, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1281/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1281 /Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D.Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr.Dr
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri A.T.Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No.1281 /Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Adhunik Infrastructure (P)Ltd. . -vs.- J.C.I.T, Range-10, Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AADCA 1315 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Miraj D.Shah, AR For the Respondent : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr.Dr Date of Hearing : 22.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 23.05.2018. ORDER Per Shri M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order for the Asst Year 2010-11 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A…

Bhinmal Contractors Property & Land Developers P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 7207/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM ITA No.7083/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year :2009-10) ITA No.1420/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year :2007-08) M/s. Bhinmal Contractors Vs. ACIT / DCIT – 4(1) Property and Land Developers Mumbai Pvt.Ltd., Mohanlal Jain & Co., Chartered Accountants 10, Chartered House Ground Floor, Dr. C.H.Street Marine Lines Mumbai – 400 002 PAN/GIR No.AABCB4536C Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sanjay Kapadia Revenue by Shri T.A. Khan Date of Hearing 20/03/2018 Date of Pronouncement 26/04/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARM…

ACIT, Cir-33, Kolkata vs. M/S Ho Hup Simplex Jv, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 692/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 692/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Acit, Circle-33, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Ho Hup Simplex Jv [Pan: Aaaah 0653 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 692/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 ACIT, Circle-33, Kolkata -vs- M/s Ho Hup Simplex JV [PAN: AAAAH 0653 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT For the Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA Date of Hearing : 14.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 21.03.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Kolkata [in short the ld CIT(A)] in…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5269/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & G. Manjunatha, Am Patel Engineering Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of Sv Road, Patel Estate, Income Tax, Cc-3(4),Room Jogeshwari (W), No. 1915, 19Th Floor Air Vs. Mumbai-400102 India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaacp2567L The Dy. Commissioner Of Patel Engineering Ltd. Income Tax, Cc-3(4),Room Sv Road, Patel Estate, No. 1915, 19Th Floor Air India Vs. Jogeshwari (W), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400102 Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Mayur Kisnadwala, ARFor Respondent: HN Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 80I

…m payments. While holding so the CIT(A) relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. 322 ITR 323 (para 5 of that order), assessee's own case for AY 2000-01 reported in 94 ITD 411 (paras 46 and 47) and Bharat Udyog Ltd. 24 SOT 412 to hold that the assessee is a developer and not a contractor. 7. We had also gone through the tender document filed by the assessee which is placed on record, after analyzing the major clause of the agreement to determine the scope and nature of work undertaken, we found that assessee was a developer, therefore, eligible for claim of deduction u…

Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai

ITA 4992/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & G. Manjunatha, Am Patel Engineering Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of Sv Road, Patel Estate, Income Tax, Cc-3(4),Room Jogeshwari (W), No. 1915, 19Th Floor Air Vs. Mumbai-400102 India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaacp2567L The Dy. Commissioner Of Patel Engineering Ltd. Income Tax, Cc-3(4),Room Sv Road, Patel Estate, No. 1915, 19Th Floor Air India Vs. Jogeshwari (W), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400102 Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Mayur Kisnadwala, ARFor Respondent: HN Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 80I

…m payments. While holding so the CIT(A) relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. 322 ITR 323 (para 5 of that order), assessee's own case for AY 2000-01 reported in 94 ITD 411 (paras 46 and 47) and Bharat Udyog Ltd. 24 SOT 412 to hold that the assessee is a developer and not a contractor. 7. We had also gone through the tender document filed by the assessee which is placed on record, after analyzing the major clause of the agreement to determine the scope and nature of work undertaken, we found that assessee was a developer, therefore, eligible for claim of deduction u…

DCIT, Circle-12(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 141/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 250Section 80Section 80ISection 91

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 140/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2005-06 & I.T.A. No. 141/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata…………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square Aayakar Bhawan 6th Floor Kolkata- 700 069 [PAN : AAECS 0765 R] M/s. Simplex Infrastucture Ltd……………………………………………………………………………..Respondent 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 Appearances by: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee.…

DCIT, Circle-12(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 140/KOL/2015[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2017AY 2005-2006

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 250Section 80Section 80ISection 91

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 140/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2005-06 & I.T.A. No. 141/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata…………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square Aayakar Bhawan 6th Floor Kolkata- 700 069 [PAN : AAECS 0765 R] M/s. Simplex Infrastucture Ltd……………………………………………………………………………..Respondent 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 Appearances by: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee.…

M/S Jaypee Infratech Ltd, Noida vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3126/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblejaypee Infratech Ltd. Vs Acit Sector 128 Circle 1 Noida Noida Aabcj9042R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80I

…n the facts and law involved as a developer of the infrastructure facility, even if it has not commenced operating and maintaining but is developing the same, in view of direct decisions in its favour including inter alia reported in ACIT v. Bharat Udyog Ltd. 118 ITD 336 which follows the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in K. P. Verghese v. ITO 131 ITR 597 (SC) and as held in TRG Industries (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2013) 35 Taxmann.com 253 (Amritsar - Tribunal) and said decision of the Hon’ble ITAT in appellant’s own case in AY 2009-10. 7. That the Ld. CIT has erred in making certain erroneous observations regarding…

Sugam Construction Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., (OSD)Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 968/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 968/Ahd/2013 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/ Assessment Year : 2009-10 वष" M/S. Sugam Construction Acit (Osd), Private Limited, Vs Circle – 8, 4Th Floor, Arun Complex, Opp. Ahmedabad C.U. Shah Collage, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-09 Pan : Aaccs 6759 H आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1612/Ahd/2013 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit (Osd), M/S. Sugam Construction Circle – 8, Vs Private Limited, Ahmedabad Pan : Aaccs 6759 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/ (Respondent) थ" Assessee By : Shri P.M. Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Shri R. P. Maurya, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11/09/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/09/2017 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Mahavir Prasad:- These Cross Appeals By The Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xiv, Ahmedabad Dated 26.03.2013 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds In Its Appeal Vide Ita No.968/Ahd/2013:- 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Ao Is Against The Law, Equity & Justice. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Upholding The Disallowance Made By The Ld. Ao Of Interest Expenses Considering As Excessive Payment To The Persons Specified U/S 40A(2)(B) Of The Act Of Rs.15,65,236/-.

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. P. Maurya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40aSection 43BSection 80Section 80GSection 80I

…y. It was incorrect on the part of the AO to hold that the assessee being fallen within the first category not entitled for the deduction. The decisions of ABG Heavy Industries(supra), Koya & Company (supra), and Radhe Developers (supra) and Bharat Udyog Ltd. 118 ITD 336(Mum.) thus support the stand taken by the assessee. The assessee has executed the construction of infrastructure facility in respect of the Government Projects, as is evident from the list of the agreements placed on record, hence it was a factual error on the part of the AO to say that the assessee had entered in some contract with few private p…

The DCIT.Circle-8, Ahmedabad vs. Sugam Constructions Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1612/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 968/Ahd/2013 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/ Assessment Year : 2009-10 वष" M/S. Sugam Construction Acit (Osd), Private Limited, Vs Circle – 8, 4Th Floor, Arun Complex, Opp. Ahmedabad C.U. Shah Collage, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-09 Pan : Aaccs 6759 H आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1612/Ahd/2013 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit (Osd), M/S. Sugam Construction Circle – 8, Vs Private Limited, Ahmedabad Pan : Aaccs 6759 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/ (Respondent) थ" Assessee By : Shri P.M. Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Shri R. P. Maurya, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11/09/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/09/2017 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Mahavir Prasad:- These Cross Appeals By The Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xiv, Ahmedabad Dated 26.03.2013 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds In Its Appeal Vide Ita No.968/Ahd/2013:- 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Ao Is Against The Law, Equity & Justice. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Upholding The Disallowance Made By The Ld. Ao Of Interest Expenses Considering As Excessive Payment To The Persons Specified U/S 40A(2)(B) Of The Act Of Rs.15,65,236/-.

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. P. Maurya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40aSection 43BSection 80Section 80GSection 80I

…y. It was incorrect on the part of the AO to hold that the assessee being fallen within the first category not entitled for the deduction. The decisions of ABG Heavy Industries(supra), Koya & Company (supra), and Radhe Developers (supra) and Bharat Udyog Ltd. 118 ITD 336(Mum.) thus support the stand taken by the assessee. The assessee has executed the construction of infrastructure facility in respect of the Government Projects, as is evident from the list of the agreements placed on record, hence it was a factual error on the part of the AO to say that the assessee had entered in some contract with few private p…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the Assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated herein above

ITA 3643/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Smt Vidisha Kalra
Section 143(3)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…payments. While holding so the CIT(A) relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. 322 ITR 323 (pa ía 5 of that order), assessee's own case for AY 2000-01 reported in 94 lTD 411 (paras 46 and 47) and Bharat Udyog Ltd. 24 SOT 412 to hold that the assessee is a developer and not a contractor. 7. We had also gone through the tender document filed by the assessee which is placed on record, after analyzing the major clause of the agreement to determine the scope and nature of work undertaken, we found that assessee was a developer, therefore, eligible for claim of deduction u/…

Patel Pratibha Jv, Mumbai vs. ITO 31(2)(5), Mumbai

ITA 678/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Wardhan DatarFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80Section 80I

…etc. which was in domain of the government, that the government was the developer. For this purpose reliance may be placed on the decision of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of ACIT v. M/s Pratibha Industries Limited 141 ITO 151) and ACIT vs Bharat Udyog Limited 24 SOT 412 and decision of Jaipur ITAT M/s. Patel Pratibha JV in matter of Om Metal Infraprojects Limited ITA 722/JP/200S and decision of the Rajkot ITAT in the case of M/s Tarmat Bel JV ITA 1111/RJT/2010 and decision of Pune bench of ITAT in matter of Mahalaxmi Construction Corporation Limited v. ACIT ITA. 433/PN/2007 and decision of Pune bench of ITAT in…