TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 592X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be used as crèche by the residents of the housing project - The area is not for the benefit of general public but for the exclusive use of the flat owners alone – the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Versus M/s. Arun Excello Foundations Pvt. Ltd [2012 (12) TMI 415 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] followed - where there is a partial compliance, deduction u/s.80IB(10) is allowable on pro-rata basis where both commercial and residential houses have been built – thus, the CIT(A) is justified in granting proportionate relief to the assessee - CIT(Appeals) rightly held that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 80IB on the entire project except the profit element in respect of area of 1906 sq. ft., which exceeds the maximum statutory limi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he return, the assessee claimed deduction u/s.80IB(10). The Assessing Officer held that the assessee does not fulfill all the conditions, as laid down in section 80IB for claiming deduction, therefore, the assessee is not eligible to claim the same. As per the provisions of section 80IB, the commercial area in respect of project should not exceed 2000 sq. ft. However, in respect of project RC-Westminister , the commercial area is 3906 sq. ft., which is in excess of the stipulated maximum commercial area. The Assessing Officer in all the three AYs under consideration, denied the benefit of deduction u/s.80IB to the assessee. Aggrieved by the assessment orders, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) vide imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... towards commercial establishments but in actual, the area is to be used for common purposes of the residents and not for setting up any commercial establishment. The ld.Counsel for the assessee in order to further strengthen his submissions and in further support of the order of CIT(Appeals), relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Arun Excello Foundations P. Ltd. reported as 86 DTR (Mad) 99 Viswas Promoters Private Ltd. Vs. ACIT reported as 81 DTR (Mad) 68. 5. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of both the sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below, as well as the judgments on which the ld.Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance. The Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court by placing reliance on the decisions rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Brahma Associates (supra) and CIT Vs. Vandana Properties (supra) concluded that, within a composite housing project, where there are eligible and ineligible units, the assessee can claim deduction in respect of eligible units in the project. The assessee is entitled to claim proportionate relief in the unit to the extent of the built-up area. 6. In view of the law laid down by the Hon ble Madras High Court, we find that the CIT(Appeals) is well justified in granting proportionate relief to the assessee. The CIT(Appeals) has rightly held that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s.80IB on the entire project except the profit el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
