TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stands concluded in favour of the RespondentAssessee by the decision of this Court in CIT v/s. Raviraj Kothari Punjabi Associates [2015 (5) TMI 361 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein held held that the clause (d) of section 80IB(10) is prospective in nature and would not apply to the housing projects commenced prior to 1.4.2005. Also see CIT v/s. M/s. Sarkar Builders [2015 (5) TMI 555 - SUPREME COURT] - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed after 01042005? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the Tribunal passed without appreciating and evaluating all the relevant facts and evidences including circumstantial evidences, not perverse? 3 The RespondentAssessee is a builder who claimed deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Act in respect of its Housing Project at Pune. The adm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|