2017 (2) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oject of Brahma Estate. This finding of fact is not shown to be perverse in any manner. On the basis of above facts, the impugned order placed reliance inter alia upon decision of this Court in CIT vs. Vandana Properties [2012 (4) TMI 54 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] to hold that Brahma Avenue being a separate and different project is independent of project Brahma Estate and it cannot be considered to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing that though the amended provision of section 80IB(10)(d) came into operation w.e.f. 01.04.2005 it was not applicable to the project 'Brahma Majestics' relating to A.Y. 2007-08 without appreciating and applying the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Isthimian Steamship Line (20 ITR 52) Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. (60 ITR 262) and Reliance Jute I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sel appearing for the Revenue very fairly states that the issues raised herein stand concluded against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in CIT vs. Happy Home Enterprises [2015] 372 ITR 1 (Bom) and decision of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Sarkar Builders [375 ITR 392]. (b) In the above view the questions as proposed do not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus not entertained. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X