Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 90 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IB(10) rejected - assessee is not a developer but a works contractor - assessee did not satisfy the conditions for allowing the deduction - HELD THAT:- As referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.Raheja Development Corporation Vs. State of Karnataka [2005 (5) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] . However, going through an order passed by the CIT(A), we find that this issue was decided in favour of the assessee and the revenue did not prefer any appeal against the said finding recorded by the CIT(A) in paragraph 5 and 6 of its order dated 30.06.2016. Therefore, the Revenue is not entitled to canvass the said contention before this Court. Accordingly, substantial question of law no.3 is rejected. Scope of amendment with effect from 01.04.2010 vide Finance Act 2009 - transaction entered prior to amendment - applicability of ammendment in A.Y. 2010-11 - HELD THAT:- This issue does not arise in the instant case as on facts, as recorded by the Tribunal, the transactions took place much prior to the amendment coming into force. The registered sale deed and the agreements had been executed and the transaction stood concluded in November 2008 much prior to the amendment. In fact, this issue is subject matter of consideration before the Tribunal in the Elegant Estates [2016 (5) TMI 1441 - ITAT CHENNAI] and the stand taken by the assessee was accepted by the Tribunal. This order was carried by the Revenue by way of appeal which was dismissed by judgement dated 19.06.2018 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Vs. Elegant Estates [2018 (6) TMI 1191 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] . Question was considered by the Hon'ble Division Bench and it was held that it was not a question of law much less a substantial question of law.
|