https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235014 The appellant, a contractor for various works, claimed a deduction under section 80-IA for maintaining an infrastructure facility. However, the assessing authorities deemed the contract as a works contract, not qualifying for the deduction. The courts upheld this decision, emphasizing that the appellant's work was repair and maintenance, not infrastructure development. Despite the appellant's argument regarding investment in protection walls, the courts found the contract solely for maintenance, leading to the denial of the deduction. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the denial of the deduction under section 80-IA for the works contract. en-us Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jul 2013 08:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235014 The appellant, a contractor for various works, claimed a deduction under section 80-IA for maintaining an infrastructure facility. However, the assessing authorities deemed the contract as a works contract, not qualifying for the deduction. The courts upheld this decision, emphasizing that the appellant's work was repair and maintenance, not infrastructure development. Despite the appellant's argument regarding investment in protection walls, the courts found the contract solely for maintenance, leading to the denial of the deduction. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the denial of the deduction under section 80-IA for the works contract. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235014