https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304841 The appeal by the Revenue was allowed, and the order was pronounced on February 9, 2010. The Tribunal ruled that the assessee, a civil contractor for a water supply project, was not eligible for deduction u/s.80-IA(4) based on the precedent that this deduction is applicable only to the developer of an infrastructure facility, not a contractor. The Tribunal found no distinguishing features in the present case compared to the precedent case and overturned the decision of the CIT(A) in favor of the Revenue. en-us Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Oct 2022 12:55:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304841 The appeal by the Revenue was allowed, and the order was pronounced on February 9, 2010. The Tribunal ruled that the assessee, a civil contractor for a water supply project, was not eligible for deduction u/s.80-IA(4) based on the precedent that this deduction is applicable only to the developer of an infrastructure facility, not a contractor. The Tribunal found no distinguishing features in the present case compared to the precedent case and overturned the decision of the CIT(A) in favor of the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304841