Katira Constructions Limited v. Union of India and Others

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Indu Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than :- 50 -: ITA Nos.186, 187, 188 & 189/Hyd/2018 amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter e…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Indu Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…ks contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than :- 50 -: ITA Nos.186, 187, 188 & 189/Hyd/2018 amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter e…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

…contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

…contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

…contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

…s contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Gayatri Projects Limited., Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4)., Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

…s contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

…s contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gvpr Engineers Limited, Hyderabad

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2013-14 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Deputy Commissioner C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Of Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Ita Nos.1576 & 1577/Hyd/2017 Gpvr Engineers Limited Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar Revenue By: Smt. D. Komali Krishna Date Of Hearing: 27/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Two Revenue & Assessee’S Cross Appeals I.E., Ita Nos.1576 & 1617/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2013-14 & Ita No.1577 & 1618/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Hyderabad’S Separate Orders Dt.30.06.2017 & 29.06.2017, Passed In Case Nos.0075 & 0436/2016-17, Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

…s contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gvpr Engineers Limited, Hyderabad

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2013-14 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Deputy Commissioner C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Of Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Ita Nos.1576 & 1577/Hyd/2017 Gpvr Engineers Limited Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar Revenue By: Smt. D. Komali Krishna Date Of Hearing: 27/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Two Revenue & Assessee’S Cross Appeals I.E., Ita Nos.1576 & 1617/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2013-14 & Ita No.1577 & 1618/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Hyderabad’S Separate Orders Dt.30.06.2017 & 29.06.2017, Passed In Case Nos.0075 & 0436/2016-17, Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

…s contract awarded by any person (including the central or state government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred in sub-section (1).” 11. Learned CIT-DR at this stage quoted Katira Constructions Limited Vs. Union of India and Others (2013) 352 ITR 513 (Guj) upholding vires of the latter explanation that the same is purely explanatory in nature than amending the existing provision and therefore, the question of it being levying any tax with retrospective effect would not rise. It is thus explicitly clear that their lordships have held this latter explanation in the nature of a plain and simple…

Nec-Ncc-Maytas Jv, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

…submitted that the letter and spirit of Section 80IA in general as well as Explanation to Sec.80IA introduced by Finance Act,2009 (w.e.f.1.4.2000) in specific, has been dealt in detail by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katira Construction Ltd [352 ITR 513]. When there is no entrepreneurial risk and financial involvement, the entire project is developed by the Government and the assessee is merely a works contractor, the assessee is not be eligible to claim deduction ix] s 80IA ( Specific reference is made to paras-27 to 36 of the above referred decision) 5. Regarding the words "including Central…

Nec-Ncc-Maytas Jv, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

…submitted that the letter and spirit of Section 80IA in general as well as Explanation to Sec.80IA introduced by Finance Act,2009 (w.e.f.1.4.2000) in specific, has been dealt in detail by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katira Construction Ltd [352 ITR 513]. When there is no entrepreneurial risk and financial involvement, the entire project is developed by the Government and the assessee is merely a works contractor, the assessee is not be eligible to claim deduction ix] s 80IA ( Specific reference is made to paras-27 to 36 of the above referred decision) 5. Regarding the words "including Central…

Nec-Ncc Maytas Joint Venture, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Cirlce-6(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

…submitted that the letter and spirit of Section 80IA in general as well as Explanation to Sec.80IA introduced by Finance Act,2009 (w.e.f.1.4.2000) in specific, has been dealt in detail by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katira Construction Ltd [352 ITR 513]. When there is no entrepreneurial risk and financial involvement, the entire project is developed by the Government and the assessee is merely a works contractor, the assessee is not be eligible to claim deduction ix] s 80IA ( Specific reference is made to paras-27 to 36 of the above referred decision) 5. Regarding the words "including Central…