Appeal dismissed; merger validity not reopened, leasehold rights transferred to corporate debtor formed liquidation estate; section 36(4)(a)(iv) inapp...
ITAT held that deduction claimed u/s 80-IA(4) had been allowed by CIT(A) without adequate verification and merely by following the Settlement Commission's order for earlier years, which is under challenge before the HC. ITAT ruled that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 80-IA(4) only for those projects that were subject matter of the Settlement Commission proceedings and continued in AYs 2013-14 to 2015-16, subject to verification by the AO. Projects for which the assessee had suo motu withdrawn the claim before CIT(A) are to be disallowed. For all other projects, AO must independently examine contract terms and allow deduction only where they are similar to eligible projects. Revenue's appeals were allowed for statistical purposes and matters remanded to AO.
ITAT held that deduction claimed u/s 80-IA(4) had been allowed by CIT(A) without adequate verification and merely by following the Settlement Commission's order for earlier years, which is under challenge before the HC. ITAT ruled that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 80-IA(4) only for those projects that were subject matter of the Settlement Commission proceedings and continued in AYs 2013-14 to 2015-16, subject to verification by the AO. Projects for which the assessee had suo motu withdrawn the claim before CIT(A) are to be disallowed. For all other projects, AO must independently examine contract terms and allow deduction only where they are similar to eligible projects. Revenue's appeals were allowed for statistical purposes and matters remanded to AO.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.