https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219745 ITAT upheld that the assessee, a project developer, qualified for deduction under s.80-IA(4) because the statutory phrase "it" denotes the enterprise carrying on the business and need not own the infrastructure; the activity was development, not a mere works contract, so AO's disallowance was set aside. The tribunal confirmed notices under s.153A were valid and the second proviso on abatement did not affect finalized proceedings. Liabilities written back under s.41(1) are business income; the tribunal approved allocation of the Rs.1.95 crore cessation amount between 80-IA and non-80-IA projects in proportion to turnover and directed the AO to add the appropriate proportion to taxable income for AY 2005-06. en-us Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Aug 2025 15:58:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219745 ITAT upheld that the assessee, a project developer, qualified for deduction under s.80-IA(4) because the statutory phrase "it" denotes the enterprise carrying on the business and need not own the infrastructure; the activity was development, not a mere works contract, so AO's disallowance was set aside. The tribunal confirmed notices under s.153A were valid and the second proviso on abatement did not affect finalized proceedings. Liabilities written back under s.41(1) are business income; the tribunal approved allocation of the Rs.1.95 crore cessation amount between 80-IA and non-80-IA projects in proportion to turnover and directed the AO to add the appropriate proportion to taxable income for AY 2005-06. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219745