Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 964 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IB - pro rata deduction for eligible units - Tribunal allowing the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) on pro rata basis considering the fact that the assessee did not comply with the limit on built-up area prescribed of Section 80IB(10)(c) in respect of eligible fats in the project ‘Kumar Kruti’ and ‘Kumar Shantiniketan’- as suggested that even if a single fat in a housing project is found to exceed the permissible maximum built-up area of 1500 sq.ft., the assessee would lose its right to claim the benefit of deduction in respect of the entire housing project under Section 80IB(10) - HELD THAT:- A plain reading of the said section does not support that interpretation at all. Learned Counsel for the appellant would have been perfectly justified, had the legislature in its wisdom, in clause ‘c’ used the words “each residential unit has a maximum built-up area ”. This would then clearly indicate that the intention was to ensure that each and every residential unit in such a housing project confirms inter alia to the size prescribed with a view to make an assessee eligible for claiming the deduction. It is a well settled principle of interpretation of statutes that when the language of a statute is unambiguous and admits of only one meaning, no question of construction of a statute then arises. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the Apex Court judgment in Nelson Motis [1992 (9) TMI 355 - SUPREME COURT] It, therefore, becomes clear that clause ‘c’ only qualifies an eligible residential unit and no more and further that if there is such a residential unit, which confirms to the requirement as to size in a housing project, all other conditions being fulfilled, the benefit of deduction cannot be denied in regard to a such residential unit. Section 80IB(10), nowhere even remotely aims to deny the benefit of deduction in regard to a residential unit, which otherwise confirms the requirement of size at the cost of an ineligible residential unit with a built-up area of more than 1500 sq.ft. We are of the opinion that the order of the ITAT directing the A.O. to workout the pro rata deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Act, 1961, in regard to the eligible residential units, merits no interference. The appeal is held to be without merit.
|