TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 2198
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Objection filed by the assessee is in support of the order of the Ld. CIT(A). No other grounds have been raised in the Cross-Objection in respect of the appeals filed by the Revenue. 4. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that in ITA No. 2148/Chny/2017 for the AY 2013-14, Ground Nos 1.2 to 1.7 were against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in granting the assessee the benefit of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act and in ITA No. 1023/Chny/2018 for the AY 2014-15, Ground Nos .2.1 to 2.4 were against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of the non-payment of the employee's contribution to PF & ESI within the due date of relevant acts. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that the assessee is a company which is in the business of Engineering, Procurement and Construction. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee had done multi-disciplinary engineering and turnkey contracts in the field of water, sewage and industrial effluents. The projects undertaken by the assessee were specified in Page No. 2 of the Assessment Order. It was a submission that as the projects undertaken by the assessee were only construction projects and consequently, had not complie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Tribunal. Accordingly, we find no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2015 is also dismissed. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. 8. At the outset, in respect of the issue of the deduction u/s. 80 IA(4) in respect of the contract entered into by the assessee with government agencies, it is noticed that the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. V.A. Tech Wabag Pvt. Ltd., in T.C.A. Nos 196 to 201 of 2019 dated 07.03.2019 as also the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Chettinad Lignite Transport Services Pvt. Ltd., in TCA Nos 741, 1266 of 2009 and 162 of 2015 dated 06.03.2019, wherein, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has held as follows: 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the findings of facts rendered by the learned Tribunal as well as the First Appellate Authority do not deserve any interference by this Court under Section 260A of the Act and no S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting and maintaining the same. The only ground on which, the Assessing Authority denied the said benefit was that the Assessee himself did not enter into any such contract with the Railways or with the Central Government. 9. The learned Tribunal, however, in our opinion, rightly applied the Proviso to Section 80IA(4) of the Act and held that since the Assessee was recognised as contractor for these railway sidings, which undoubtedly fell under the definition of "infrastructure facility", it was entitled to the said benefit under Section 80IA of the Act. The grounds on which the Assessing Authority denied the said benefit to the Assessee ignoring the effect of Provisos to Section 80IA(4), therefore, could not be sustained. The learned Tribunal, in our opinion, has rightly held that the Proviso does not require that there should be a direct agreement between the transferee enterprise and the specified authority for availing the benefit under Section 80IA of the Act. There is no dispute before us that the Assessee was duly recognised as transferee or assignee of the principal contractor M/s.ST-CMS Company Private Limited and was duly so recognised by the Railways to operate a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isdictional High Court in the case of M/s. V.A. Tech Wabag Pvt. Ltd., & M/s. Chettinad Lignite Transport Services Pvt. Ltd., referred to supra, the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue, which are as under: 4.7 In the context of these factual parameters, let us examine the stipulations as per Section 80IA(4) of the Act. The deduction under Section 80IA is allowable to any enterprise carrying on the business of (i) Developing or (ii) Operating and maintaining iii) Developing, operating and maintaining any, infrastructure facility 4.7.1 The factual matrix as it emerges dearly establish that the appellant company has undertaken risks and not only designed and executed the project, but also made substantial investments in terms of skilled manpower as well as plant and machinery and raw materials. I find the reasoning of the AO to be erroneous when he states that the appellant company is a mere contractor and that it is not the owner of the infrastructure projects. If the interpretation of the AO is taken to its logical culmination, it would only be the Governments or local bodies that can claim deduction under Section 80IA of the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efect correction and liability period. The design of the project, the procurement of materials, payment to labour and other personnel are all appellant's responsibilities. In my considered view, these are not simple works contract, but come within the perimeter of "developing an infrastructure facility" within the meaning of Section 80IA of the Act. 4.7.2 Two peripheral arguments have been made by the AO in disallowing the claim under Section 80IA. i. That the profit has not been "derived from" the business of developing infrastructure projects. ii. That the appellant has itself accepted that it is a contractor by accepting tax to be deducted as per the provisions of Section 194C of the Act. 4.7.3 On examination of the financial statements as well as the Auditors' Certificate in Form 10CCB, I find that the appellant company has claimed deduction under Section 80IA only From the projects eligible for the claim. The details are mentioned as below: a) Total Turnover of the Appellant Rs. 57,84,65,107/- b) Eligible Turnover of the Appellant Rs. 9,48,46,926/- c) Profit as per the Profit & Loss Account Rs. 3,01,12,....