Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 2053 - AT - Income TaxDeduction under section 80IB(10) - proportionate deduction - block less than the prescribed eligible area - HELD THAT:- Some of the flats constructed by the assessee are in excess of area of 1000 sq. ft. and the assessee has allotted more than one flat to some of the buyer or their relative. The assessee has reduced its claim to the extent of flat constructed in excess of 1000 sq.ft. as well as in case where more than one residential unit in housing project is allotted to the person being individual or his family member. CIT(A) by following the decision of Viswas Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2012 (11) TMI 1117 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] directed the Assessing Officer to allow the proportionate deduction under section 80IB (10) wherein held that assessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IB(10) on proportionate basis in respect of those block which are less than the prescribed eligible area. Further in case of Sreevatsa Real Estates (P.) Ltd. [2012 (11) TMI 633 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] held that where some of the residential units developed by assessee exceeded area of 1500 sq. ft., it was entitled to claim deduction under section 80-IB(10) pro rate for housing units having area of less than 1500 sq.ft., Bangalore Tribunal in case of SJR Builders [2009 (8) TMI 953 - BANGALORE TRIBUNAL COURT] held that merely because some flats were larger than the specified limit of 1500 sq.ft., the assessee would not lose the benefit in its entirety. Only with reference to the flats which had more than the prescribed area, the assessee would lose the benefit. We find that there is no illegality and infirmity in the order passed by ld. CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the proportionate deduction under section 80IB(10). No contrary, the decision is brought on record the notice to take the different view. In the result, ground of appeal raised by Revenue is dismissed. Disallowance u/ 14A r.w.r. 8D - contention of assessee before the lower authority was that the assessee made investment on certain fund as strategic partner in joint venture - HELD THAT:- Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. [2018 (3) TMI 805 - SUPREME COURT] held that the dominant purpose for which investment into shares is made by assessee may not be relevant as section 14A applies irrespective of whether shares are held to gain control or as stock-in-trade, where shares are held as stock-in-trade, main purpose is to trade in those shares and earn profits therefrom and, in process, certain dividend is also earned which is tax exempt under section 10(34); expenditure attributable to exempt dividend income will have to be appointed to be disallowed under section 14A Disallowance u/s 14A to the Book profit for the purpose of calculating MAT u/s 115JB - Also in ACIT Vs Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd.. [2017 (6) TMI 1124 - ITAT DELHI] held that the Computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2), is to be made without resorting to computation as contemplated under section 14A read with rule 8D. Therefore, this ground of appeal is restored back to the file of assessing officer to pass the order afresh after considering the aforesaid two decisions. Needless to order that before passing the order the assessing officer shall grant sufficient opportunity to the assessee before passing the order in accordance with law. Hence, this ground of appeal raised by the revenue is allowed.
|