9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e income was assessed at Rs. 18,40,98,671. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (A) which was partly allowed. The assessee then preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in ITA No. 698/Chandi/2006 vide order dated 27-2-2007 has set aside the order of the Assessing Officer on the issue of rebate of allotment of houses of Rs. 7,09,57,404 and held as under : "Since the facts are not clear as to what type of details had not been furnished by the assessee for the perusal of the Assessing Officer, we deem it proper to set aside this issue back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee is also directed to furnish the information/details asked by the Assessing Officer. The Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as assessee has not made any fresh submissions and has relied upon on his earlier submissions, the assessee's reliance on those submissions was found to be misplaced. In view thereof, the expenditure on rebate on allotment of houses of Rs. 7,09,57,404 was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. 5. Before the Commissioner of Income-tax (A), the contention of the learned AR for the assessee was as under :-- (i) The assessee board has been created to satisfy the need of housing accommodation in the State of Haryana. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 7,09,57,404 on account of rebate. This issue has been remanded back by the Hon'ble Tribunal to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. (ii) It was stated be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to make such a decision. The decision was taken keeping in view the reputation of the board and to avoid litigation. (v) There are no separate year wise details available with the assessee as the rebate has not been allowed on year to year basis. The rebate has been allowed during the year as one time settlement of demand of the buyers of the houses. The said rebate was allowed to Government Institution only. (vi) The expenditure claimed by the assessee has been incurred wholly for business purposes and it is neither of capital nature nor of personal nature. Hence, the expenditure is allowable. 6. The Commissioner of Income-tax (A) observed "that the counsel on the other hand has argued that the rebate has been allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in various properties of the assessee Board, the said expenditure is allowable in the hands of the assessee. The rebate was allowed as one time settlement during the year under consideration pursuant to the meeting of the Board of Directors of the assessee on 18-4-2002 in which it was decided to allow the said rebate. There is no merit in the stand of the Assessing Officer that the said rebate is not relatable to the year under assessment proceedings, once the decision to allow the rebate to various institutions, who had booked their flats with the assessee was taken by the Board of Directors of the assessee on 18-4-2002, i.e., during the financial year itself. The rebate was allowed as one time settlement and not because of any waiver of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
