TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT upholds full Section 80IA deduction and lower TDS rates under Sections 194C/194I for assessee</h1> <h3>A.C.I.T., Circle-12, Kolkata Versus M/s. Selvel Media Services (P) Ltd.</h3> A.C.I.T., Circle-12, Kolkata Versus M/s. Selvel Media Services (P) Ltd. - TMI ISSUES: Whether revenue generated from construction and maintenance of bus shelters qualifies as an 'infrastructural facility' under the explanation to Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thereby entitling the claimant to deduction under Section 80IA.Whether the decision to allow deduction under Section 80IA can be sustained in light of Supreme Court and ITAT precedents, including Liberty India vs CIT and L&T Transportation Infrastructure Ltd. vs ITO.Whether the classification of hoardings as 'temporary structure' rather than 'permanent structure' justifies allowing depreciation at 15% instead of 100%.Whether deduction of TDS under Section 194C instead of Section 194I on payments related to the subject matter was appropriate. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: On the issue of Section 80IA deduction for bus shelters, the Court held that the deduction was correctly allowed as the issue had been previously decided in favor of the claimant by the ITAT in the claimant's own case, applying the ratio that bus shelters qualify as infrastructure; thus, 'we do not see any infirmity in the order of ld.CIT(A) on this issue.'Regarding reliance on Supreme Court and ITAT decisions adverse to the claimant, the Court found that subsequent decisions did not override the earlier ITAT ruling in the claimant's own case for the relevant assessment years, and therefore the CIT(A)'s allowance was justified.Concerning depreciation, the Court upheld the CIT(A)'s treatment of hoardings as temporary structures allowing depreciation at 15%, referencing prior ITAT decisions favoring the claimant's position and noting absence of contrary material from the department.On TDS deduction, the Court affirmed the CIT(A)'s allowance of TDS deduction under Section 194C instead of Section 194I, following earlier ITAT decisions in the claimant's sister concerns, and found no valid ground to interfere with this finding. RATIONALE: The Court applied the principle of consistency and precedent by relying on prior ITAT decisions in the claimant's own case and related entities, emphasizing that identical or substantially similar facts had been adjudicated favorably.The legal framework centered on the interpretation of Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, particularly the explanation to Section 80IA(4) defining 'infrastructural facility,' and the provisions relating to TDS under Sections 194C and 194I.The Court recognized the binding effect of earlier tribunal rulings on identical issues, noting the absence of any material or legal argument sufficient to overturn those findings.No dissent or doctrinal shift was recorded; the Court adhered strictly to established precedents and statutory interpretation.
TaxTMI 