B.T. Patil& Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd. v. ACIT

Q: How many judgments cite B.T. Patil& Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd. v. ACIT?

63 judgments on BharatTax cite B.T. Patil& Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd. v. ACIT (126 TTJ 577), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does B.T. Patil& Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd. v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 80IA, Section 115JB, Section 143(1), Section 14A, Section 14A read with Rule 8D, Section 250(1).

126 TTJ 577Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#1818 most cited

What is B.T. Patil& Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

A Special Bench decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning Section 80IA deduction for infrastructure facility developers can be recalled if it fails to consider a binding jurisdictional High Court judgment.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

B.T. Patil & Sons · 126 TTJ 577 · ITAT Special Bench recalled · Section 80IA deduction · infrastructure facility · developer status · binding precedent · ABG Heavy Engineering · eligibility for 80IA · recall of Tribunal order

Sections most often in play

Section 80IA Section 115JB Section 143(1)Section 14A Section 14A read with Rule 8D Section 250(1)Section 270A Section 80IA(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(13)section 80la section 80ia(4)(i)section 80l section 33b section 86 section 80ib(4)section 250(1)section 80ia(4)infrastructure facility section 167b resulting company

Judgments citing B.T. Patil& Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd. v. ACIT

Asst CIT Cen Cir 25, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed, whereas cross objection of the assessee is allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6605/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234DSection 80Section 80ISection 80l

…ahalaxmi Construction Corpn. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT in ITA 433/Pn/2007 has been relied upon; iii) ACIT v. Bharat Udyog Ltd. 24 SOT 412 (Mum) As regards the CIT DR's argument that the decision of the larger Bench in B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction Pvt. Ltd. 126 TTJ 577 (Mum) is still good law, we rely on the confirmatory order [reported in 34 Taxmann.com 97) (Pune)] passed by the Pune Bench. 10. In view of the above discussion, we uphold the action of CIT(A) for allowing claim of deduction u/s.80IA(4) in respect of all the projects. 11. Ground 2 is with regard to disallowance of a sum of Rs. 88,69,937/- under s…

ACIT, Chennai vs. B.Dhanasekaran, Chennai

ITA 360/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy

For Appellant: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri.N. Devanathan, Advocate

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…uction u/s 80 IA(4) is available to the assessee who has undertaken work of a mere developer. I.T.A.Nos.620/Mds/13 :- 6 -: and 360/Mds/2015 4.1 In this regard, the decision of ACIT Vs. Bharat Udyag Limited 118 ITD 336 and Patel Engineering Ltd., Vs.DCIT 84 TTJ 646 are relevant. As per CBDT Circular No.4/2010(F.No.178/14/210 ITA-I) dated 18.05.2010, widening of existing roads constitutes creation of new infrastructure facility for the purpose of section 80 IA(4)(i). The assessee is not required to develop the entire road in order to qualify for deduction u/s 8OlA as has been held by the Hon'ble Bombay High…

ACIT, Chennai vs. B.Dhanasekaran, Chennai

ITA 620/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy

For Appellant: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri.N. Devanathan, Advocate

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I