Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
A constituent of joint ventures and consortiums formed to bid for government infrastructure contracts was treated as eligible for deduction under section 80IA(4) because the arrangements were pass-through vehicles, with execution, risk, and profit sharing resting on the members in their agreed proportions. The absence of a direct contract in the assessee's own name did not defeat eligibility where its participation was substantively through the consortium contract. The Tribunal also held that the Explanation to section 80IA(13) excludes only pure works contracts; the assessee, having undertaken design, procurement, construction, commissioning, and operation and maintenance obligations while bearing entrepreneurial and investment risk, was a developer and not a works contractor. Deduction was therefore allowed for both assessment years.
A constituent of joint ventures and consortiums formed to bid for government infrastructure contracts was treated as eligible for deduction under section 80IA(4) because the arrangements were pass-through vehicles, with execution, risk, and profit sharing resting on the members in their agreed proportions. The absence of a direct contract in the assessee's own name did not defeat eligibility where its participation was substantively through the consortium contract. The Tribunal also held that the Explanation to section 80IA(13) excludes only pure works contracts; the assessee, having undertaken design, procurement, construction, commissioning, and operation and maintenance obligations while bearing entrepreneurial and investment risk, was a developer and not a works contractor. Deduction was therefore allowed for both assessment years.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
