TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 1523
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... So it is presumed that notice of hearing has been served on the assessee. Accordingly the appeals are decided exparte qua the assessee on merits after hearing the ld. DR. 3. First we will deal with the appeal in ITA No. 1602/Kol/2012 for A.Yr. 2009-10. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) was justified in allowing the deduction of Rs. 98,66,819/- u/s 80IA in respect of revenue generated from the construction and maintenance of bus shelter when the same do not qualify as infrastructural facility as per explanation to Sec. 80IA(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also noted that for A. Yr. 2005-06 on the same issue by applying the ratio of judgement in the case of M/s. Vantage Advertising P. Ltd. where the Bus shelters were considered part of the road and hence infrastructure, ITAT had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. However, the A.O. did not allow the claim of the assessee by following the decision of the ITAT, Chennai in the case of M/s. L&T Transportation Infrastructure Limited vs ITO, CC.II(4), Chennai in ITA No. 1680/Mds./10 order dated 22.08.2011. 5.1. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to ld. CIT(A), who decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing that besides the decision of ITAT in the assessee's own case, the identical issue in the case of assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n this issue of the departmental appeal. 10. Vide ground no.5 the grievance of the department relates to the action of the ld. CIT(A) in allowing the deduction of TDS u/s 194C instead of 194 I of the Act as directed by the AO. 11. The facts relating to this issue in brief are that the assessee had deducted TDS @2% u/s 194C of the Act on an amount of Rs. 17,81,85,502/-. AO was of the view that on payments towards these, TDS was required to be deducted @10% u/s 194 I of the Act and not u/s 194C of the Act. He disallowed a sum of Rs. 17,60,71,247/-. (value for payments more than Rs. 1,20,000/-) on account of lower deduction of TDS. 12. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A), who allowed the claim of the assessee b....