Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 516 - AT - Income TaxClaim of deduction u/s.80IB(10) - CIT(A) allowed the claim - Held that:- The building plan of the housing project has been first approved by the Thane Municipal Corporation on 21.9.2004 which was sanctioned by the Executive Engineer, Thane Municipal corporation on 17.09.2004. Once it is established that the building plan of the housing project was first approved on 21.9.2004 and no plan was approved prior to that date, we need to go into the other aspects of question. Accordingly the housing project in question was approved on 21.09.2004 when the plan was approved by the Thane Municipal Corporation. The correspondence between the assessee and the Thane Municipal Corporation prior to that approve of the building is not relevant to decide the date of approval as per the Explanation to section 80IB(10). In view of the above discussion, we decide this issue against the revenue and in favour of the assessee Denying benefit of deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of profits arising from development of 12 residential units of buildings Varsha and Grishma of the housing project “Prakruti Park”at Thane - Held that:- The proportionate deduction is allowable when the other conditions regarding the area of plot is fulfilled after reducing the proportionate area of the plot representing the residential units which have the area exceeding 1000 sq.ft.. In the case in hand, the learned AR of the assessee has pointed out from the record that the total area of plot is 18742.2 sq.mtrs. and if proportionate area of 12 flats combined into six residential units is reduced from the total area of plot, ,the balance would be much more than the requirement of one acre. We note that the total number of flats in two buildings are 192 out of which 13 flats are merged for making six residential units. Therefore, keeping in view of the total area of the plot, we find that the remaining area is more than one acre as required u/s.80IB(10). We do not find any error or illegality in the order of the CIT(A) qua this issue - Decided against assessee.
|