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 →

DCIT, CC-9, Mumbai Versus M/s. Acme Combines

2016 (5) TMI 144 - ITAT MUMBAI

Deduction under section 80 IB - effect of amendment - prospectively - Held that:- The prohibition against sale of more than one flat in a housing project to members of same family has been inserted specifically with effect from 1. 4. 2010 and the same cannot be treated with retrospective effect.

A perusal of the provisions of Sec. 80IB(10) would show that it provides deduction for housing projects which are approved on or after 1. 10. 1998 and upto 31. 3. 2008. It also differentiates .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oner : Shri Sandeep Goel For the Respondent : Shri Ravikant Pathak ORDER Per Rajendra, AM Challenging the order of the CIT (A)-37, Mumbai, dated 1/01/2014, the Assessing officer (AO) has filed the present appeal. Effective ground of appeal is about allowing the deduction under section 80 IB of the Act. 2. Assessee-firm, a builder and developer, filed its return of income on 9/10/2010, declaring total income at rupees nil, after claiming deduction of ₹ 48. 09 Lacs under section 80 IB(10) 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

per the provisions of the Act. In the earlier round of assessment, in the regular assessment under section143 (3) the AO had denied the claim made by the assessee under section 80 IB (10). At that time it was held that three buildings each considered a separate project and therefore the plot area for each project was less than 1 acre. The assessee, contended that three buildings constituted a single project. However, the AO made the disallowance. In the appellate proceedings, the First Appellate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r section 80 IB (10) of the Act for the reason that each building being a separate project was built on a plot of land having area less than 1 acre. In addition to it the AO held that some of the combine residential units exceeded 1000 sq. ft. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the FAA. After considering the available material on record, he held that identical issue had arisen in the earlier years, that the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

over separate flats to the flat purchaser, that afterwards the purchaser combine the two flights, that the builder was not responsible for the same, that purchase of two adjoining flats by one family itself was not restricted under section 80 IB(10), that the restriction on sale of two flats to an individual/same family members was introduced with effect from 1/04/2010, that the FAA had, while deciding the appeals for the AY 2004-05 to 2008 - 09 had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. W .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment order as well as in the impugned assessment order u/s. 153A were identical, that in the original assessment proceedings the issue was decided against the AO up to the High Court level, that it could not be said that new set of facts had emerged during the course of search proceedings, that the AO himself had admitted those facts in the remand report. Considering these facts, the FAA decided the first ground of appeal in favour of the assessee. With regard to the area of flats, exceeding 100 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

deeds for the same, that the society charges and municipal taxes payable by the owners of the residential units was separately charged for both the residential units and not on a combine basis as would have been the case if the combine flats had been prepared and sold as a single residential unit. The assessee had argued that the said units had been sold to purchasers as separate units and as per the agreements buyers were prohibited from making any alteration in the structural design of the fla .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not be sustained. Finally he allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. During the course of hearing before us the Departmental Representative (DR) left the issue to the discretion of the bench. The Authorised Representative (AR) stated that the Tribunal and the Honorable Bombay High Court had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for the earlier years. 5. We find that while deciding the appeal, for the AY. s. 2004 - 05 to 2008 - 09 (ITA/4149 - 4153/Mum/2012 , dated 2/01/2014), the Tribu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issue of size of plot. However, while completing the assessment u/s. 153A, the AO has not accepted the order of the Tribunal by stating that new facts emerged which were not available at the time of earlier proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) requested the AO to furnish what are those new facts which have emerged after the date of the order of the Tribunal . The AO filed a remand report dt. 27. 2. 2012. The relevant portion of the Remand report i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

43(3) r. w. s. 153A of the I. T. Act, 1961. On perusal of the details filed and verified from the records, it is observed that in both the assessment orders the respective A. O s have pointed out almost same set of facts as far as non compliance of conditions laid down u/s. 80IB(10(b) of the I. T. Act is concerned. It is also a matter of fact that the assessee firm has got relief on this count from the CIT(A) and Hon ble ITAT Mumbai has further upheld the decision of the CIT(A) by dismissing 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

order as well as in the impugned assessment order u/s. 153A are the same. This being the fact of the matter, it cannot be said that new set of facts have emerged during the course of assessment u/s. 153A. Now that this issue has already attained its finality in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 4060 & 4061/M/08 which has been confirmed by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in I. T. X. A. L. 1452 with 1453/2010. Respectfully following the order of the Tribu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

authority has approved buildings plan with residential unit of less than 1000 Sq ft and granted completion certificate as such deduction u/s. 80IB(10) has to be allowed. The assessee further contended that purchase of two adjoining flats by the same buyers or within one family by itself was not restricted and no adverse conclusions could be drawn from them. It was further submitted that even if the allegation of the Ld. AO that the two flats were sold as one combined unit was correct, facts on .....

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