TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arat, JJ. By Appellant Shri T. Shankar, SR DR O R D E R PER Kul Bharat, Judicial Member:- This appeal of Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Baroda ( CIT(A) for short) dated 12-01-2010 for the assessment year (AY) 2006-07. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in allowing the deduction u/s. 80IB(10) to the assessee, who was not granted approval by the local authority to carry on the business of an undertaking developing and building housing projects, in contravention of a plain reading of section 80IB(1) r.w.s. 80IB(1), Explanation to section 80IB(10) and rule 18B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... king from the beginning to the end. 5. The ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in dispensing with the ownership of land intrinsically linked with the approval by the local authority, also in disregard of section 80IB(10)(b)) providing for the condition of minimum size of the plot of land, which can be fulfilled only by the landowner and the person getting approval from the local authority. 6. The ld CIT(Appeals) erred in making assumption regarding passing on of the benefit of section 80IB(10) by the landowner getting approval from the local authority for developing and building of housing projects to the person with whom he enters into agreement for execution of such projects, without there being any provision in section 80IB for such passing on, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O) is justified and relied on the assessment order. 5. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee made elaborate submission in the form of statement of facts and Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee has recorded that the assessee in its return of income deducted u/s. 80IB(10) which was disallowed by AO on the ground that assessee was not the owner of the property and permission was not granted in assessee s name Vadodara Municipal Corporation granted approval in the name of the original land owners and not in the name of assessee/developer. Ld. CIT(A) observed in para-2.1 and 2.2 of his order, which is reproduced below:- 2.1. The assessee in its return of income has clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide its order dated 07.11.2008 in ITA No. 1503/Ahd/2008 has decided in favour of the appellant on both the issues i.e., allowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) and not restricting the claim to utilized FSI of 9490 sq.ft. Following the order of the Hon ble ITAT the appellant s claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) is allowed. We find that the fact that the similar issue pertaining to A.Y 2005-06 has been decided in favour of assessee by the Hon ble co-ordinate Bench in ITA No. 1503/Ahd/2008 is not controverted by the Revenue. We are conscious that against the ITAT order rendered in ITA No.1503/Ahd/2008 an appeal was field by the Revenue before Hon ble jurisdictional High Court and Hon ble jurisdictional High Court has also decided in fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
