IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ( THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT ) ITA. NO: 2489/AHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16) GUJARAT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. BLOCK NO. 6, 5 TH FLOOR, UDYOG BHAVAN SECTOR-11, GH ROAD, GANDHINAGAR- 382011 V/S DCIT, GANDHINGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AABCG 1330 R APPELLANT BY: SHRI S. N. SOPARKAR, PARIN SHAH RESPONDENT BY: SHRI O.P. SHARMA, CIT/DR. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 11 -08-2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 -08-2020 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR, AHMEDABAD DATED 07.12.2018 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2015- 16 AND FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN: ITA NO. 2489/AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2015-16 2 1.LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING ACTION OF A.O. MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 8,30,47,224/- DENYING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA(4) OF THE ACT. 2. LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS TO HOLD THE APPELLANT AS A CONTRACTOR TO DENY DEDUCTION U/S 80IA (4) OF THE ACT BY MECHANICALLY FOLLOWING APPELLATE ORDER OF A.Y. 2012/13 & 2013/14 & 2014/15 IGNORING JUDGMENT SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT DIRECTLY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 3. LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS NOT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT DISTINGUISHING FACTS OF JUDGMENT FOLLOWED BY HON,BLE ITAT IN A.Y. 2011/12 WITH THE FACTS OF APPELLANTS CASE. 4. LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING APPELLANT A BUFFER AGENCY GRANTING WORK CONTRACT TO LOCAL BODIES ON BEHALF OF GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT IS NOT A DEVELOPER OF INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY FOLLOWING EARLIER ORDERS. 5. LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS CONFIRMING THE VIEW THAT APPELLANT DID NOT CARRY ANY RISK OR REWARD FOR THE EXECUTION OF WORK AS IT WAS ENTITLED TO ONLY FIXED PERCENTAGE OF THE PROJECT COST FOLLOWING EARLIER ORDERS. 6. LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN IGNORING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF LEGAL SUITS LODGED AGAINST THE APPELLANT FOR COMPENSATION THAT SUBSTANTIATED BUSINESS RISKS UNDERTAKEN BY THE APPELLANT AS A DEVELOPER. 7. LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234A/B & C OF THE ACT IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 8. INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A GOVERNMENT COMPANY REGISTERED U/S 617 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. THE ASSESSE COMPANY IS IN THE BUSINESS OF DEVELOPING INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AND IS APPOINTED AS NODAL AGENCY/IMPLEMENTING AGENCY FOR IMPLEMENTING PROJECTS AS PER THE DIRECTIVES OF GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT SINCE 2001. 3. THE COMPANY RECEIVES GRANTS FUNDS AND WHICH ARE TO BE USED STRICTLY FOR THE SPECIFIED PROJECTS ONLY. GUDC IS A SOLE RESPONSIBLE TO CARRY OUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES ON BEHALF OF URBAN LOCAL BODIES AS DIRECTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT. THE ASSESSE COMPANY IS INVOLVED IN ALL ACTIVITIES FROM IDENTIFICATION OF NEED OF INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY, PLANNING, ITA NO. 2489/AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2015-16 3 TENDERING, ISSUING CONTRACTS IN VARIOUS ACTIVITIES, SUPERVISION ETC TILL THE PROJECT IS HANDED OVER TO THE LOCAL BODIES. 4. AT THE OUTSET, LD. A.R. FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THIS MATTER IS AGAINST THE ASSESSE AS DECIDED IN ITA NO. 634/AHD/2018 CONCERNING A.Y. 2014-15. THEREFORE SAME MAY BE VIEWED SUITABLY. IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION RENDERED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 31- 08- 2020 SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 31/08/2020 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHMEDABAD