Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The assessee provided project advisory services to Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) formed to execute infrastructure contracts obtained from NHAI. The assessee contended that the SPVs were its 'enterprise' or 'undertaking' for claiming deduction u/s 80IA. However, it was held that the SPVs were separate legal entities executing the infrastructure facility development and operation work. The assessee raised invoices on the SPVs for its services, indicating recognition of the SPVs as separate entities. The SPVs filed separate returns, and the assessee's income was not credited to its profit and loss account, contrary to an owned enterprise. The consortium members charged the SPVs more than their costs, earning profits. Therefore, the SPVs could not be considered the assessee's undertaking, and the assessee merely executed a works contract for the SPVs. Consequently, the assessee was ineligible for deduction u/s 80IA as a works contractor. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection of the Section 80IA deduction claim.
The assessee provided project advisory services to Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) formed to execute infrastructure contracts obtained from NHAI. The assessee contended that the SPVs were its 'enterprise' or 'undertaking' for claiming deduction u/s 80IA. However, it was held that the SPVs were separate legal entities executing the infrastructure facility development and operation work. The assessee raised invoices on the SPVs for its services, indicating recognition of the SPVs as separate entities. The SPVs filed separate returns, and the assessee's income was not credited to its profit and loss account, contrary to an owned enterprise. The consortium members charged the SPVs more than their costs, earning profits. Therefore, the SPVs could not be considered the assessee's undertaking, and the assessee merely executed a works contract for the SPVs. Consequently, the assessee was ineligible for deduction u/s 80IA as a works contractor. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection of the Section 80IA deduction claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.