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 →

Income Tax Officer, Ward – 9 (1) , Ahmedabad Versus Shyam Builders

2015 (9) TMI 68 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

Deduction under section 80IB(10) - Held that:- Entrepreneurial risk in the present case was undisputedly borne by the assessee, we confirm the stand taken by the ld CIT(A) and grant of deduction under section 80IB(10) to the assessee, and decline to interfere in the matter. See Shri Umeya Corporation vs. Income Tax Officer [2015 (9) TMI 108 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos.2598 & 2599/Ahd/2011 - Dated:- 21-8-2015 - Pramod Kumar and S.S. Godara, JJ. For The Appellant : .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nvenience. 3. Since common grounds have been raised by the appellant in both these appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience, the grounds raised in ITA No.2598/Ahd/2011 for A.Y. 2007-08 are reproduced as under :- ITA No.2598/Ahd/2011 for A.Y. 2007-08 1) The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee s claim for deduction of ₹ 79,69,534 u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. 2) The Ld. Commissioner o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ousing project and abide by the terms and conditions of its approval right from the inception of the project till its completion rests with the Societies. Assessee was just a contractor AND not a developer. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4) It is therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad may be set aside an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ative Housing Society Limited and Shyam (Bopal) Co-operative Housing Society Limited. It was in this backdrop and for this reason that deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act was declined to the assessee. However, when the matter was carried in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), she reversed the action of the Assessing Officer and allowed deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act by observing, inter alia, as follows :- 16. After going through rival submissions on BU permission point I am of 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

an issue BU permission and the appellant has produced certificate from the Gram Panchayat that project was completed in the year 2007-08, i.e. well within 4 years from the end of the financial year 2005-06 when development permission was received by the appellant. And even if taxes were to be collected from F. Y. 2009-10 then too the appellant completed the project within time and therefore there is no justification for denying 80IB(10) on this ground. 17. As the appellant has been found fulfill .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 7. We find that the issue in appeal is now covered, in favour of the assessee, by a rather recent decision of the co-ordinate bench, in the case of Shri Umeya Corporation vs. Income Tax Officer (ITA No.211/Ahd/2010; order dated 07.07.2015) wherein the Tribunal has observed as follows :- 6. We find that, in the case of CIT Vs Radhe Developers [(2012) 341 ITR 403 (Guj)], Hon ble jurisdictiona .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

wned by the assessee seeking such deductions. 33. It is well settled that while interpreting the statute, particularly, the taxing statute, nothing can be read into the provisions which has not been provided by the legislature. The condition which is not made part of s. 80-IB(10) of the Act, namely that of owning the land, which the assessee develops, cannot be supplied by any purported legislative intent. 34. We have reproduced relevant terms of development agreements in both the sets of cases. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see had developed the housing project. The fact that the assessee may not have owned the land would be of no consequence. (Emphasis, by underlining, supplied by us) 7. In our humble understanding, therefore, in order to answer the question as to whether the condition precedent for deduction under section 80IB has been satisfied inasmuch as whether or not the assessee is engaged in developing and building housing projects , all that is material is whether assessee is taking the entrepreneurship r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ructing residential units thereon could probably be the simplest business models in this line of activity, but merely because there is an improvisation in the business model or because the assessee has adopted some other business models for the purpose of developing and building housing project does not vitiate fundamental character of the business activity as long as the risks and rewards of developing the housing project, in substance, remain with the assessee. It is difficult, if not altogeth .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ny particular business model that an entrepreneur adopts in the course of developing and constructing housing project. 8. As regards learned CIT(A) s reliance on the decision of a larger bench of this Tribunal, in the case of B T Patil & Sons (Belgaum) Constructions Pvt Ltd vs ACIT [(2010) 1 ITR (Tribunal) 703 (Mum)], what has been referred to by her is the view of the three member bench resolving the point of difference between the members of the division bench. However, this view was still .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

directions in the case before the Tribunal, the Tribunal s final order had, inter alia, concluded as follows: ……….while giving effect to the opinion of Third Member u/s.255(4) of the Act, we take view in conformity with order of jurisdictional High Court in case of ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) available at this time though contrary to the opinion expressed by the Third Member. So in view of above discussion, following the ratio of jurisdictional High Court in case of AB .....

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