Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Voora Property Developers Pvt. Ltd.,

2015 (3) TMI 456 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Entitlement to deduction under Section 80IB(10) - assessee had failed to fulfill the primary condition in relation to the size of area of 1 acre plot for each housing plot as laid down in the statute - ITAT allowed the claim - Held that:- On facts, we find that there is no dispute in the approval granted by the CMDA in respect of the composite housing scheme. When the Legislature introduced 100% deduction under the Income Tax Act, it was known that the local authorities could approve a housing p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee would be entitled to 100% deduction on the entire project approved by the Local Authority. See (Commissioner of Income Tax V. Shantiniketan Property Foundation (P) Limited [2015 (3) TMI 452 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee. - Tax Case (Appeal) No.56 of 2015 - Dated:- 9-3-2015 - The Honourable Mr. R.Sudhakar And The Honourable Mr. R.Karuppiah JJ. For the Appellant : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Standing Counsel For the Respondent : None JUDGMENT (Delivered by R.SUDHAKAR,J.) This Tax Cas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

condition in relation to the size of area of 1 acre plot for each housing plot as laid down in the statute? ii) Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad especially when the entire land on which six projects were constructed was only 1.06 acres of land and therefore the conditions stipulated under Section 80IB(10) in relation to development of size of each plot being 1 acre was not satisfied?" 2. The brief facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows: The assessee is a company engaged in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

claimed a sum of ₹ 2,40,76,271/- as deduction under Section 80IB(10). The case of the assessee was selected under CASS and notice under Section 143(2) was issued on 12.09.2008. Scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 31.12.2009. The Assessing Officer allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 80IB(10) for the assessment year under consideration. 3. Finding that the order of the Assessing Officer is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, the Commissioner of Inco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the assessee did not fulfill the essential condition of minimum area of one acre for a single project as laid down under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction granted earlier to the assessee. 4. As against the said order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who upheld the findings of the Assessing Officer, thereby dismissed the appeal. 5. Aggrieved by the same, the as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Vandana Properties reported in 353 ITR 36 (Bom). 7. The Tribunal, on hearing both sides, came to hold that the assessee had developed a project in a land measuring 1 acre and 6.5 cents and allotted 1022 sq.ft. of undivided share of land to each of the 48 allottees and hence, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act as a composite scheme. For better clarity, the findings of the Tribunal reads .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

evenue that the assessee is having land more than one acre as envisaged under Section 80IB(10). As it is evident from the records, the assessee has raised construction of 6 different blocks giving them different names for the purpose of convenience and identification. The ld. counsel for the assessee has placed on record a copy of the sale deed in respect of one of the allottees, to show that all the allottees have been given undivided share in land from the total area of 1.065 acres. The sale d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in each block and in total there are 48 allottees. Thus, it is clearly evident that all the allottees have been given undivided share in total land measuring 1.065 acres. We find force in the submissions made by the ld. counsel for the assessee that all the 6 blocks are part of the same housing project. A further perusal of the records show that permits have been granted for each block on the same day which further fortifies the claim of the assessee that the projects are part of the composite h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

law. 10. Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue and perused the materials placed before this Court. 11. We find, on facts, there appears to be no dispute or confusion, except the plea of the Department that the assessee did not fulfill the requirements prescribed under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act . On facts, we find that there is no dispute in the approval granted by the CMDA in respect of the composite housing scheme. When the Legislature introduced 100% deduction .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ct. Since the project was approved in accordance with Development Control Rules, the assessee would be entitled to 100% deduction on the entire project approved by the Local Authority. 12. The above-said view was fortified by this Court in an identical circumstance in the decision reported in (2012) 83 CCH 267 ChenHC (Commissioner of Income Tax V. Shantiniketan Property Foundation (P) Limited, wherein, this Court referring to the decision in the case of CIT V. Vandana Properties reported in (201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version