9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 726X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. At the time of hearing, no submissions were made by the learned counsel of the assessee. Thus, this ground of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. In ground no.4, the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A) confirming the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. At the time of hearing, the learned AR did not make any submission on this ground of the appeal, hence, the same is dismissed for want of prosecution. 6. The only remaining ground of the appeal is ground no.2, where in the grievance of the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance under section 80IB(10) of the Act of Rs. 74,34,997/- made by the AO. 7. The brief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and clause 7 of the development agreement, the learned CIT(A) arrived at the conclusion that the assessee was engaged by the landowners for carrying out the housing project as per the specification and plan obtained by the landowners from the local authority. The assessee has no authority or powers to construct the house building project on his own, on the said land, and the assessee was merely a builder who carry out the work as per the directions and plan etc. given to it. The learned CIT(A) also observed that the assessee has not developed minimum one acre of land mandatorily provided in section 80IB(10) the Act. He observed that although it was not disputed by the AO that conditions mentioned in clauses (b), (c) & (d) of section 80IB( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It should have developed the housing project at its own cost and risks. He observed that the ITAT, Mumbai Larger Bench in the case of M/s.B.T.Patil & Sons Belgaum Construction P. Ltd., dated 26.10.2009 in ITA Nos.1408 & 1409/PN/2003 for A.Y.2000-2001 and 2001-2002) where the deduction under section 80IA has been denied holding the assessee to have entered into a works contract. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. 9. The learned AR of the assessee submitted before us that the only ground on which the AO has disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80IB(10) is that the assessee was not the owner of the land. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Radhe Deve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ogous to balcony. We find that the issue of land ownership is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Radhe Developers (supra). Therefore, respectfully following the same, in our considered view, lower authorities were not justified in disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80IB of the Act, on such ground. 12. With regard to other observations of the learned CIT(A), in respect of non-proper development of the land of one acre, the requirement of law, as held by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s.Shreenathhji Construction Vs. ITO, in ITA No.3224/Ahd/2009 order dated 9.11.2012 is as under: "We find that it is not mandatory requirement to fully u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
