9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 1062X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (10) of the Income Tax Act of Rs. 1,03,79,815/- in respect of profit derived from development of residential building by holding that assessee is covered by proviso to clause (a) and (b) of section 80IB (10) without appreciating the fact that the project was approved by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority on 7.10.2002 which did not fall within the period of approval as per Board's Notification No.2 of 2011. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT (A) was justified in holding that revised project and plan of the assessee was approved clause (a) and clause (b) of section 80IB (10) of the Act and as such rigors of clause (a) and clause (b) would not be applicable to the project of the assessee witho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a Slump Rehabilitation Project and the time limit provided in the statute will not be applicable to the assessee in view of the proviso to section 80IB(10). The contents of para 6.1 of the impugned order are relevant and the same reads as under: "6.1. Therefore, from the proviso below clause (b) of sub-section 80IB(10), it is clear that if any project is declared within the scheme framed by Central Government or Statement from Slum Rehabilitation / redevelopment, then regors of clause (a) and clause (b) will not apply to such projects. There is no denial of the fact that the project of the assessee has been approved as Slum Rehabilitation Project by Slum Rehabilitation Authority of Maharahtra State and the approval has been given on 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n specifically made applicable, therefore, such a time limit cannot be imposed by way of subordinate legislation. Such notification can only clarify the statutory provisions and not override them or restrict the operation of the main enactment. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the time limit of approval on / or after 1st April, 2004 will not be applicable in the case of the proviso to section 80IB(10)." 6. Considering the above, we are of the opinion that the CIT (A) has rightly adjudicated the issue under consideration and we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT (A). Therefore, the order of the CIT (A) is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 7. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
