Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
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 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
