Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 326 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - deduction u/s 80IB(10) - while completing the original assessment AO disallowed assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) primarily on the reasoning that the approval for the housing project was granted by the local authority prior to 01/10/1998 - FAA while deciding the appeal of the assessee allowed the deduction while disposing of the revenues appeal against the aforesaid order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the Tribunal restored back the issue to AO for fresh adjudication - HELD THAT:- Tribunal has observed that from the appeal order passed under section 47 of the Maharashtra regional and city planning Act,1966, it appeared that there was some construction in the project prior to the amendment proposal in the development plan forwarded by the owner of the land which was rejected by CIDCO vide order dated 18/06/1998. The aforesaid observation of the Tribunal assumes considerable importance as the commencement of the housing project post or prior to 1/10/1998 will have a crucial bearing in deciding the legibility of the assessee in availing deduction under section 80IB(10) Actual date of completion of project is also very much relevant for fulfillment of the other condition of section 80IB(10). Though, it is the say of the assessee that both the aforesaid conditions have been fulfilled, however, reading of the impugned assessment order does not throw any clarity on the assessee’s claim as the AO has not at all recorded any factual finding regarding fulfillment of basic conditions of section 80IB(10) of the Act. Assessment order passed is very cryptic and without any discussion. The Assessing Officer has passed the order in a summary manner allowing assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IB(10). Though AO has referred to certain submissions made by the assessee on different dates, however, he has not made any discussion about the enquiry/verification conducted by him in compliance to the specific directions of the Tribunal and what is the result of such enquiry/verification qua the issue of deduction claimed under section 80IB(10). Though, it may be a fact that in course of assessment proceedings, the assessee might have furnish certain information/details in support of its claim however, the Assessing Officer is required to enquire into and actually verify assessee’s claim to reach a logical conclusion. On the face of specific direction by the Tribunal on the issue, the minimum the Assessing Officer was required to do was to record a factual finding regarding the actual commencement and completion of the housing project. Unfortunately, a reading of the impugned assessment order as well as the other material on record clearly reveal that the Assessing Officer has failed to make proper enquiry in compliance to the directions of the Tribunal before allowing assessee’s claim. That being the case, the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Hence, in our opinion, learned PCIT was well within his jurisdiction in exercising power under section 263 to revise the assessment order. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the decision of learned PCIT in exercising power under section 263 of the Act. - Decided against assessee.
|