<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (12) TMI 483 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254139</link>
    <description>A housing project developed under an agreement was treated as eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) because the assessee had taken possession of the land, borne development risk and cost, exercised full construction control, enrolled members, and collected consideration. The court applied Radhe Developers and held that the broader sales tax meaning of &quot;works contract&quot; could not be imported into section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act. Supreme Court decisions relied on by the Revenue, being rendered under sales tax and VAT statutes, did not change that position. The activity was therefore not a disqualifying works contract, and the deduction remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=370892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 483 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254139</link>
      <description>A housing project developed under an agreement was treated as eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) because the assessee had taken possession of the land, borne development risk and cost, exercised full construction control, enrolled members, and collected consideration. The court applied Radhe Developers and held that the broader sales tax meaning of &quot;works contract&quot; could not be imported into section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act. Supreme Court decisions relied on by the Revenue, being rendered under sales tax and VAT statutes, did not change that position. The activity was therefore not a disqualifying works contract, and the deduction remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254139</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>