TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Shri Girish Agrawal Respondent by Shri R.A. Verma ORDER PER JOGINDER SINGH, judicial member The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 25.1.2012. The only ground agitated before us, at the time of hearing, is regarding disallowance of claim of the assessee u/s 80IB(10) of the Act allegedly overlooking the evidences furnished before him and in holding that built up area was more than 1500 sq. ft., therefore, the required condition was not fulfilled. 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Ashish Goyal along with Shri Girish Agrawal, submitted that only one house i.e. A- 23, Crystal Campus was measured by the registered Valuer which was found to be of 19088.23 sq. ft. and is admittedly beyond the prescribed limit of 1500 sq.ft. However, the ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that this house was originally allotted to Smt. Thersiyamma Soman and at the time of allotment, the area of the house was 1235 sq.ft. and without the permission of the municipal corporation about 600 to 700 sq. ft. was added by her and thereafter the house was sold to Shri Michael Naik vide sale deed dated 10.10.2006. Regarding other houses, it was claimed that those house ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completed by the assessee on 21.8.2006 for which our attention was invited to letter of architect (page 109 of the paper book). As per the assessee, the assessee constructed 95 houses on the land measuring 4.25 acres in Khasra No. 83 situated at village Khajuri Kala, Bhopal. The said land was acquired from Smt. Usha Kapoor through Simrat Sahkari Grah Nirman Sansthan Maryadit, Bhopal, by way of sale deed dated 16.6.2003. The assessee obtained permission for development of the colony from the municipal authorities in the name of Ambika Paints Ply and Hardware Store (proprietor Mr. Rajesh Pardasani) from Town Country Planning on 12.10.2003 and further in the name of Ambika Paints Ply Hardware Stores also from Municipal Corporation on 9.10.2003 (S. No. 248 paper book page 76). It is pertinent to mention hereunder certain conditions as has been mentioned in the aforesaid approval of the Municipal Corporation dated 9.10.2003 :- If the aforesaid conditions are analysed, and more specific condition no. 6, some of the works was to be completed by the person to whom permission of development was granted. 4. Now we shall deal with the issue with respect to section 80IB(10) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect is issued by the local authority; (b) the project is on the size of a plot of land which has a minimum area of one acre: Provided that nothing contained in clause (a) or clause (b) shall apply to a housing project carried out in accordance with a scheme framed by the Central Government or a State Government for reconstruction or redevelopment of existing buildings in areas declared to be slum areas under any law for the time being in force and such scheme is notified by the Board in this behalf; (c) the residential unit has a maximum built-up area of one thousand square feet where such residential unit is situated within the city of Delhi or Mumbai or within twenty-five kilometres from the municipal limits of these cities and one thousand and five hundred square feet at any other place; 45[***] (d) the built-up area of the shops and other commercial establishments included in the housing project does not exceed 46[three] per cent of the aggregate built-up area of the housing project or 47[five thousand square feet, whichever is higher];] 48[(e) not more than one residential unit in the housing project is allotted to any person not being an individual; and (f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e required conditions under the Income Tax Act have also not been fulfilled by the assessee, therefore, from this angle also, the assessee is having no case at all. Before proceeding further, we are reproducing hereunder the relevant portion from the impugned order :- 2.2 Before me it is pleaded that the houses were made as per approved map and that the built up area may have been altered by the purchaser after handing over of occupation. This argument is not plausible for the reason that the occupant has stated that no alteration in built up area was done by him. The registered valuer has also not found any evidence of alteration. This shows that condition laid in subsection 10(c) of 80IB is not fulfilled. Regarding completion of project it is argued that the project has been completed but Municipal Corporation has not issued completion certificate. It is found that completion certificate is not issued till date by local authority. As per explanation (ii) to section 80IB(10) date of completion of construction of housing project shall be taken to the date on which the completion certificate in respect of such housing project is issued by the local authority. This clearly shows ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
