<?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>Developer versus works contractor test governs infrastructure deduction where financial, technical and execution risks are assumed.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100960</link>
    <description>Deduction for infrastructure development depends on the true nature of the contractual obligations, not on the fact that the work was awarded by government bodies. On the project documents, the assessee undertook design, engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning, and operation and maintenance, and also bore earnest money, security deposit, bank guarantee, mobilisation, cost overrun, liquidated damages, and defect rectification obligations. The Tribunal treated this as independent development of infrastructure facilities with financial, technical, and execution risks, not a mere works contract. The works contract exclusion was therefore held inapplicable and the deduction under section 80IA(4) was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:04:59 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:05:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Developer versus works contractor test governs infrastructure deduction where financial, technical and execution risks are assumed.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100960</link>
      <description>Deduction for infrastructure development depends on the true nature of the contractual obligations, not on the fact that the work was awarded by government bodies. On the project documents, the assessee undertook design, engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning, and operation and maintenance, and also bore earnest money, security deposit, bank guarantee, mobilisation, cost overrun, liquidated damages, and defect rectification obligations. The Tribunal treated this as independent development of infrastructure facilities with financial, technical, and execution risks, not a mere works contract. The works contract exclusion was therefore held inapplicable and the deduction under section 80IA(4) was allowed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:04:59 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>