The court established that a contractor can qualify for tax deduction under section 80IA if they demonstrate developmental roles and responsibilities in infrastructure projects, despite any contractual limitations.

आदेश/ORDER

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

The present appeals by the revenue are preferred against the separate orders passed by the NFAC, Delhi, even dated 22/07/2024 [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’] pertaining to AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18.

2. Since all the issues involved in these three appeals are common and identical, therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take up ITA No. 4940/Mum/2024, A.Y 2014-15 as lead case and facts narrated therein. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in allowing claim of deduction u/s.801A of the Act amounting to Rs.4,40,47,969/-."

2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee has not fulfilled the conditions laid down for claiming deduction u/s.801A of the Act."

3. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee was involved in carrying out work in the nature of rehabilitation whereas there is no reference to the term 'road widening' anywhere in work order and has not carried out any work of development of new infrastructure facility or maintaining the same."

4. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee upon completion of the contractual obligations has been paid the agreed contract price as per work completed whereas section 801A stipulates development or maintenance of infrastructure facility."

5. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the relationship between assessee and the government is that of the contractor and the contractee and the assessee has acted as a contractor only on a specific contract allotted by its principals, cost of which has been reimbursed from the principals who are the actual owner/developer?"

6. "Whether on the facts of case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified to allow the assessee's appeal by considering additional evidences such as Form No.10CCB and copy of the agreement of the enterprises with the Central Government or a State Government or a local authority or a statutory body for carrying on the tate Government or a local authority or a statutory body for carrying on the business of developing or operating and maintaining or developing, operating and maintaining a new infrastructure facility without following the statutory procedure including Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules in this respect."

7. "The Appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the ACIT-1(2)(1), Mumbai be restored."

8. "The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may necessary. "

3. There is a delay of 4 days in filing of these appeals by the revenue. After perusing the petition for condonation filed by the revenue dated 24/09/2024 and hearing the parties on this application, we are co