Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
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 Projects for which the assessee had suo motu withdrawn the claim before CIT(A) are to be disallowed.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 Projects for which the assessee had suo motu withdrawn the claim before CIT(A) are to be disallowed.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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
