Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Infrastructure Development in The Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs M/S. Aquafil Polymers Co. Pvt. Ltd.,, ... on 1 November, 2018Matching Fragments
HELD-I The provisions of section 80-IA(4), when introduced afresh by the Finance Act, 1999, the provisions under section 80-IA(4A) were deleted from the Act. The deduction available for any enterprise earlier under section 80-IA(4A) is also made available under section 80- JA(4) itself. Further, the very fact that the legislature mentioned the words (i ) 'developing' or (ii) 'operating and maintaining' or (iii) 'developing, operating and maintaining' clearly indicates that any enterprise which carried on any of these three activities would become eligible for deduction. Therefore, there is no ambiguity in the Act. Where an assessee incurred expenditure for purchase of materials himself and executes the development work, i.e., carries out the civil construction work, he will be eligible for tax benefit under section 80-1A. In contrast to this, an assesses, who enters into a contract with another person including Government or an undertaking or enterprise referred to in section 80-IA, for executing works contract, will not be eligible for the tax benefit under section 80-IA. The word 'owned' in sub- clause (a.) of clause (I) of sub-sec.(4) of section 80-IA refers to the enterprise. By reading of the section, it is clear that the enterprises carrying on development of infrastructure development should be owned by the company and not that the infrastructure facility should be owned by a company. The provisions are made applicable to the person to whom such enterprise belongs to is explained in sub-clause (a). Therefore, the word 'ownership' is attributable only to the enterprise carrying on the business which would mean that only companies are eligible for deduction under section 80-IA(4) and not any other person like individual, HUF, firm etc. [Para 26] According to sub-clause (a ), clause ([) of sub-section (4) of section 80- IA, the word 'it' denotes the - enterprise carrying on the business. The word 'it' cannot be related to (he infrastructure facility, particularly in view of the fact that infrastructure facility includes Rail system, Highway project, Water treatment system, Irrigation project, a Port, an Airport or an Inland port which cannot be owned by any one. Even otherwise, the word 'it' is used to denote an enterprise. Therefore, there is no DCIT Vs. Aquafil Polymers Co.P.Ltd.
infrastructure is developed and handed over to the Government and as explained by the CBDT vide its Circular, dated 18-5-2010, such activity is eligible for deduction under section 80-IA (4). This cannot be considered as a mere works contract but has to be considered as a development of infrastructure facility. Therefore, the assessee is a developer and not a works contractor as presumed by the revenue. The circular issued by the Board clearly indicate that the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 8()-IA(4). The department is not correct in holding that the assessee is a mere contractor ij the work and not a developer. [Para 28] As per the provisions of section 80-IA, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word 'contractor' is used to denote a person entering into an agreement for undertaking the development of infrastructure facility. Every agreement entered into is a contract. The word 'contractor' is used to denote the person who enters into such contract. Even a person who enters into a contract for development of infrastructure facility is a contractor. Therefore, the contractor and the developer cannot he viewed differently. Every contractor may not be a developer hut every developer developing infrastructure facility on behalf of the Government is a contractor. {Para 29] Section 80-IA intends to cover the entities carrying out developing, operating and maintaining the infrastructure facility keeping in mind the present business models and intend to grant the incentives to such entities. The CBDT, on several occasions, clarified that pure developer should also be eligible to claim deduction under section 80-1A which ultimately culminated into amendment under section 80-IA in the Finance Act, 2001, to give effect to the aforesaid circulars issued by the CBDT. To avoid misuse of the aforesaid amendment, an Explanation was inserted in section 80-IA, in the Finance Act, 2007 to 2009. to clarify that mere works contract would not he eligible for deductions under section 80-IA. But, certainly, the Explanation cannot be read to do away with the eligibility of the developer; otherwise, the Parliament would have simply reversed {he amendment made in the Finance Act, 2001. Thus, the aforesaid Explanation was inserted, certainly, to deny the lax holiday to the entities who do mere works contract or sub- contract as distinct from the developer. This is clear from the express intention of the Parliament while introducing the Explanation. The explanatory memorandum to Finance Act, 2007 states that the purpose of the tax benefit has all along been to encourage investment in development of infrastructure sector and not for the persons who merely execute the civil construction work. It categorically states that the deduction under section 80-IA is available to developers who undertakes DCIT Vs. Aquafil Polymers Co.P.Ltd.
IA. The word 'owned' in sub-clause (a] of clause (1) of sub-section (4) of section 80-IA refers to the enterprise. By reading of the section, it is clear that the enterprises carrying on development of infrastructure development should be owned by the company and not that the infrastructure facility should be owned by a company. Thai the provisions are made applicable to the person to whom such enterprise belongs to is explained in sub-clause (a). Therefore, the word 'ownership' is attributable only to the enterprise carrying on the business which would mean that only companies are eligible for deduction under section 80-1 A(4) and not any other person like individual. HUF, firm. etc. [Para 31] • According to sub-clause (a), clause (/) of sub-section (4) of section 80- IA. the word 'it' denotes the enterprise carrying on (he business. The word 'it' cannot be related to the infrastructure facility, particularly in view of the fact that infrastructure facility includes Rail system. Highway project, Water treatment system, Irrigation project, a Port, an Airport or an Inland port which cannot be owned by any one. Even otherwise, the word 'it' is used to denote an enterprise. Therefore, there is no requirement that the assessee should have been the owner of the infrastructure facility. [Para 32] DCIT Vs. Aquafil Polymers Co.P.Ltd.
considered as a mere works contract but has to be considered as a development of infrastructure facility.
• Therefore: the assessee is a developer and not a works contractor as presumed by the revenue. The circular issued by the Board clearly indicates that the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80- IA (4). The department is not correct in holding that the assessee is a mere contractor of the work and not a developer. [Para 33] Assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80-IA • As per the provisions of the section 80-IA, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word 'contractor' is used to denote a person entering into an agreement for undertaking the development of infrastructure facility. Every agreement entered into is a contract. The word 'contractor' is used to denote the person who enters into such contract. Even a person who enters into a contract for development of infrastructure facility is a contractor. Therefore, the contractor and the developer cannot be viewed differently. Every contractor may not be a developer but every developer developing infrastructure facility on behalf of the Government is a contractor. [Para 34] • Section 80-IA intended to cover the entities carrying out developing, operating and maintaining the infrastructure facility keeping in mind the present business models and intends to grant the incentives to such entities.