Ltd. v. ACIT

21 Taxmann.com 138Reported decision2012#2372 most cited

What is Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

The primary issue concerns the eligibility for deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, particularly concerning whether an assessee is a 'developer' or 'contractor' for infrastructure projects. The case appears to discuss the impact of subsequent amendments, such as the Explanation inserted by the Finance Act, 2007, on the classification of contracts and the availability of such deductions.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

KMC Constructions Ltd. v. ACIT · 21 Taxmann.com 138 · section 80IA(4) · developer vs contractor · infrastructure projects · deduction eligibility · works contract · Explanation to section 80IA(4) · Finance Act 2007

Sections most often in play

Section 194ASection 201(1A)Section 201(1)Section 132Section 2(28A)Section 139Section 195Section 4

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(13)section 80ia(4)(i)section 57(i)section 80iabsection 2(d)section 80lasection 86section 80ib(4)section 8osection 80lsection 80ia(5)section 167b

Judgments citing Ltd. v. ACIT

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND 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 Assessee by : Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Revenue by…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND 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 Assessee by : Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Revenue by…

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

…xmann.com 97; ii) AC IT v. Pate I KNR Joint Venture ITA 5230/M/2012; iii) DCIT v. V.R.M. (India) Ltd. ITA 81 1/Del/2008; iv) KCL BEL Tarmat JV v, ITO ITA 11 1/Rjt/2010; v) GVPR Engineers Ltd. v. ACIT 21 Taxmann.com 25 (Hyd); vi) KMC Constructions Ltd. v. ACIT 21 Taxmann.com 138 (Hyd). 9. With regard to contention of Id. CITDIR that assessee is a contractor, insofar as assessee has been mentioned as contractor in all the agreements, we rely on the following decisions :- CO No.37/Mum/2017 (A.Y.2005-06) M/s Patel Engineering Ltd. i) In the assessee's own appeal for AY 2000-01, 94 lTD 411 (Mum); ii) ACIT v. Pratibha…

M/S. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Cen Cir 24 & 26, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7283/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.7283/Mum/2007 (A.Y:2004-05) Patel Engineering Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patel Estae RD. Jogeshwari(W) Vs. 404, Aayakar Bhavan, K.K. Mumbai-400 102 Marg, Mumbai-20 .. Appellant Respondent PAN No. AAACP2567L Assessee by .. Shri Mayur Kishnadwala, AR Revenue by .. Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR Date of hearing .. 23-01-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 29-03-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These appeals by the assessee are arising out of the different orders of CIT(A), Central-IV, Mumbai, in a…

M/S. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Cen Cir 24 & 26, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7282/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.7283/Mum/2007 (A.Y:2004-05) Patel Engineering Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patel Estae RD. Jogeshwari(W) Vs. 404, Aayakar Bhavan, K.K. Mumbai-400 102 Marg, Mumbai-20 .. Appellant Respondent PAN No. AAACP2567L Assessee by .. Shri Mayur Kishnadwala, AR Revenue by .. Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR Date of hearing .. 23-01-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 29-03-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These appeals by the assessee are arising out of the different orders of CIT(A), Central-IV, Mumbai, in a…

D.C.I.T CC - Xiii, Kolkata. vs. M/S Tantia Constraction Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are dismissed

ITA 69/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…1 ITA No.58-62/Kol/2012 & 69-71/Kol/ 2013, AYs 2004-05 to 2008-09 Tantia Constructions Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri M. Balaganesh, AM & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T(SS).A No. 58 & 60/Kol/2012 Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 & I.T(SS).A No. 59,61 & 62/Kol/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Tantia Constructions Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN:AABCT0811E) Central Circle-XIII, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No. 69 to 71/Kol/2013 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Tant…

M/S. Knr- Patel (Jv), Mumbai vs. The ACIT Cir 24(1)

Accordingly, ground no.1 is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 7156/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7155/Mum/2008, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Patel Knr, Jv Acit, Circle-24(1) Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Patel Estate Road, Jogeshwari(W) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400 072. Vs. Mumbai-400 051. Pan:Aaaap 1494 N

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Kishnadwala-ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 255(4)Section 8Section 80I

…ering the binding judgment of the' Hon’ble High Court in the case of ABG, Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) and other decisions of the Tribunal. Further, he analyzed: another judgment of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of M/s. KMC Constructions Ltd vs. CIT, 21 Taxmann.com 138 (Hyderabad), dated 16.3.2012 which belongs to the subsequent period to the cited Larger Bench decision 'in 'the case of B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction Pvt Ltd (supra). In fact the CIT(A) extracted the para 46 to 44 of the said order of the Tribunal in the, case of M/s. KMC Constructions Ltd (supra) and directed the AO to allow the…

Patel Knr Jv, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 24(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, ground no.1 is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 7155/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7155/Mum/2008, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Patel Knr, Jv Acit, Circle-24(1) Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Patel Estate Road, Jogeshwari(W) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400 072. Vs. Mumbai-400 051. Pan:Aaaap 1494 N

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Kishnadwala-ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 255(4)Section 8Section 80I

…ering the binding judgment of the' Hon’ble High Court in the case of ABG, Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) and other decisions of the Tribunal. Further, he analyzed: another judgment of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of M/s. KMC Constructions Ltd vs. CIT, 21 Taxmann.com 138 (Hyderabad), dated 16.3.2012 which belongs to the subsequent period to the cited Larger Bench decision 'in 'the case of B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction Pvt Ltd (supra). In fact the CIT(A) extracted the para 46 to 44 of the said order of the Tribunal in the, case of M/s. KMC Constructions Ltd (supra) and directed the AO to allow the…

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

…" and held that the Explanation does not apply to Developer are • KCL BEL Tarmat JV v. ITO ITA 1112/RJT /2010 • Om Metal Infra-Projects Ltd. v. Addl.CIT ITA 911/JP/2010 • GVPR Engineers Ltd. v. ACIT 21 Taxrnann.com 25 (Hyd.) • . KMC Constructions Ltd. v. ACIT 21 Taxmann.com 138 (Hyd.) • ACIT v. Pratibha Industries Ltd. ITA 2197 to 2199/Mum/2007 • DCIT v. V.R.M. (India) Ltd. ITA 811/Del/2008 6.16 It may be stated that the deduction under s. 80IA(4) on the Koyna Project has been allowed to the appellant by the ITAT for A. Y 2000-01 on the basis that the appellant is a developer. However, for A.Y 2004-05, based on t…