https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776762 ITAT held that the constituent appellant cannot claim deduction under s.80IA(4) for projects awarded to and claimed by the JV, since deduction cannot be allowed to two entities for the same project; ground contesting that was dismissed. Deduction under s.80IAB was denied because the appellant merely executed contract work for a government-notified SEZ developer and was not the developer. s.14A disallowance was upheld to the extent of exempt JV profits. Certain works (supply/stacking, road improvements) were found not to be new infrastructure and their profits were excluded from s.80IA(4), while other infrastructure projects qualified for deduction; AO directed to exclude the three non-qualifying projects. en-us Tue, 07 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Aug 2025 14:21:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776762 ITAT held that the constituent appellant cannot claim deduction under s.80IA(4) for projects awarded to and claimed by the JV, since deduction cannot be allowed to two entities for the same project; ground contesting that was dismissed. Deduction under s.80IAB was denied because the appellant merely executed contract work for a government-notified SEZ developer and was not the developer. s.14A disallowance was upheld to the extent of exempt JV profits. Certain works (supply/stacking, road improvements) were found not to be new infrastructure and their profits were excluded from s.80IA(4), while other infrastructure projects qualified for deduction; AO directed to exclude the three non-qualifying projects. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 07 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776762