Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (2) TMI 695 - ITAT PUNE

2016 (2) TMI 695 - ITAT PUNE - TMI - Eligibility of deduction under section 80IB(10) - Held that:- Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in the preceding assessment years has held that the assessee is eligible to claim deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act on all the residential buildings comprising in Phase-I (A-1 and A-2) and Phase-II (A-3 to A-8). The date of completion of Phase-II shall be reckoned from the date of commencement certificate issued by PMC in respect of .....

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 : Shri Rajendra Agiwal ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A)-I, Pune dated 28.11.2013 relating to assessment year 2010-11 passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). The assessee has also filed Cross Objection against the appeal of the Revenue. 2. Both the appeal and Cross Objection relating to the assessee emanating from the same assessment year are being disposed of by this consolidated 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

ls) erred in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of the assessee's claim of deduction of ₹ 13,11,33,486/- in respect of the housing project "Kumar Primavera" instead of confirming the said disallowance. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in holding that buildings No. A-1 and A-2 constituted a separate "housing project" independent of buildings No. A-3 to A-8 and further that as the buildings A-1 and A-2 had been completed before .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eciate that the plan in respect of buildings A-3 to A-8 were a mere revision of the original plan and further that buildings A-3 to A-8 were merely in the nature of additional constructions on the same plot of 24902.715 Sq. mtrs. in respect of which the original plan had been sanctioned and the original commencement certificate had been issued on 02.02.2005. 6. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in failing to consider that for the purpose of computing the limitation period u/s. 80 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t is unambiguous from section 801B(10} that the limitation for construction has to be computed with reference to the approval given to the "project" and not the approval given for a "building". 8. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in deciding the appeal without applying Explanation (i) of section 80IB(10) to the case at hand and also by interpreting rule of completion in a manner not provided in, nor permitted by, the statutory provisions. 9. For these and suc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the case as emanating from records are that the assessee is a Promoter and Builder. In the return of income for the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee declared a total income of ₹ 4,03,06,400/-. The assessee, inter-alia, claimed deduction under section 80IB(10) of ₹ 13,11,33,486/- in the computation of income in respect of its project Kumar Primavera . The assessee allegedly developed the aforesaid project in two phases. The Phase-I consists of two residential buildings A-6 and .....

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 plan for phase-I was also revised and two more floors were added to the buildings A-1 and A-2. The plan was revised for phase-I vide same communication in which the approval for commencement in respect of buildings in phase-II i.e. A-3 to A-8 was granted by PMC. The assessee had obtained completion certificate in respect of buildings in Phase-I on 05-09-2008 and in respect of Phase-II in March, 2011. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings relevant to assessment year 2008-09 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

ed along with final completion certificate for plot no. 69. The date of first commencement is 02-02-2005, therefore, the project was supposed to be complete on or before 31-03-2009, however, completion certificate in respect of 80 flats is pending. The Assessing Officer held that since, the assessee has not completed the project on or before 31-03-2009 i.e. within 4 years from the end of the financial year in which the first commencement certificate was obtained the assessee has not complied wit .....

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 and appreciation of the facts of the case, accepted the claim of assessee and allowed deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act. The CIT(A) treated buildings A-1 and A-2 as separate housing project in Phase-I and the remaining buildings A-3 to A-8 in Phase-II as separate project. Now, the Revenue is in appeal against the findings of CIT(A) before us. 7. The Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the issue is identical and squarely covered in its own ca .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ommencement certificate issued by PMC in respect of buildings A-3 to A-8. Respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee s own case, we hold that the assessee is entitled to prorata deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act on the completed flats. In this regard, we modify the directions of the CIT(A). The appeal of the Revenue is thus dismissed. 9. The assessee in CO No.31/PN/2015 has raised the following Grounds of Cross Objection:- I. On the facts a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ection 80IB(10) of the Act) II. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - I ( the learned CIT(A) ): Pre-ponment of revenue 2. Without prejudice to the department s appeal, erred in upholding action of the learned AO with respect to pre-ponment of revenue on 25 flats on which the Respondent had received only advances and sale was not concluded as per the method of accounting consistently followed by the Respondent. The Respondent craves, to consi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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