<?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>2018 (12) TMI 285 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371516</link>
    <description>An assessee engaged in infrastructure development was discussed as eligible for section 80IA deduction where it acted as a developer, used its own funds and expertise, bore entrepreneurial risk, and was not a mere works contractor; the same issue had earlier been accepted in its own case. The article also notes that several factual disallowances and additions, including depreciation on shuttering material, advance to a joint venture, work contract tax expenses, and sundry creditors, required fresh examination because the existing record was treated as incomplete or unverified. It further records that an additional Chapter VI-A deduction claim on enhanced income was considered consequential to the remanded issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 16:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545592" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 285 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371516</link>
      <description>An assessee engaged in infrastructure development was discussed as eligible for section 80IA deduction where it acted as a developer, used its own funds and expertise, bore entrepreneurial risk, and was not a mere works contractor; the same issue had earlier been accepted in its own case. The article also notes that several factual disallowances and additions, including depreciation on shuttering material, advance to a joint venture, work contract tax expenses, and sundry creditors, required fresh examination because the existing record was treated as incomplete or unverified. It further records that an additional Chapter VI-A deduction claim on enhanced income was considered consequential to the remanded issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>