TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 1177
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ORDER Per Challa Nagendra Prasad , JM This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Coimbatore dated 19.2.1014 for the assessment year 2010-11. The only grievance of the Revenue in its appeal is that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have observed that assessee company executed works contract on be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed orders of lower authorities and decisions of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee 's own case for the earlier assessment years. On a perusal of the order of the co-ordinate Bench in ITA No.1762/Mds/2012 dated 21.11.2012 for the immediately preceding year i.e. 2009-10, we find that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the said order and the Tribunal decided this is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ought to have observed that the assessee company executed a works contract on behalf of other company. The assessee company was only a sub-contractor executing a contract on behalf of others and was squarely covered under the above explanation and thus ineligible for deduction u/s 80-IA. 5. The learned the Commissioner of Incometax( Appeals) ought to have observed that the assessee also does n....