TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpletion certificate has been issued. This fact is also not controverted by the revenue by placing any contrary material on record. Therefore, in our considered view the AO was not justified in declining the deduction on this ground. We, therefore, do not see any reason to interfere into the finding of ld. CIT (A). Another objection of the AO was that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 80IB(10(f). It is pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee that this provision came into effect from w.e.f. 01.04.2010 whereas the flats were sold in between 01.04.2009 and 31.03.2010. Therefore, the provisions were not applicable. The ld. CIT (A) has also recorded this fact in his order. The fact that the provisions of section 80IB(10(f) was introduced in the Statute Book with effect from 01.04.2010. Therefore, the transactions related to prior period do not come within the ambit of newly introduced provision. - Decided in favour of assessee TDS u/s 194C - disallowance of expenses on account Interest expenses under section 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- We find that the ld. CIT (A) has deleted the addition by taking into consideration the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was framed vide order dated 26.03.2013. The AO while framing the assessment, disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80IB(10) of ₹ 2,46,34,603/- and also disallowed the designing work fee of ₹ 2,50,000/-, commission expenses of ₹ 6,74,779/- and interest paid to Tata Motor Finance of ₹ 33,908/-. Hence the AO computed the income at ₹ 2,71,25,817/- as against the income declared in the return of ₹ 2,61,67,130/-. The assessee aggrieved by the order, preferred an appeal before ld. CIT (A), who after considering the submissions allowed the appeal thereby the ld. CIT (A) allowed the deduction under section 80IB(10) and also deleted the other disallowance of expenses. Aggrieved by this, the revenue is in present appeal. 3. Ground No. (i) is against deleting the addition of R. 2,46,34,603/- made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB(10). 3.1. The ld. D/R vehemently argued that the ld. CIT (A) was not justified in deleting the disallowance. He submitted that the AO had disallowed the deduction on the basis that the assesee did not get Completion Certificate for the Projec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hority and if completion certificate is not issued by the competent authority, it shall be deemed as if completion certificate has been issued. On the basis of the specific provision of deemed certificate of completion provided in the JDA Rules, it is submitted that the assessee has complied with the condition of section 80IB(10) and thus, rightly claimed the deduction. The ld. Counsel submitted that the housing project of the assessee was approved by UIT Kota on 31.05.2006 and as per provisions of section 80IB(10) the project was to be completed within 5 years from the end of the financial year in which the housing project is approved by the local authority. The date of approval of project is admitted by the AO in the body of assessment order. Thus the required date of completion of housing project is 31.03.2012 as per provisions of section 80IB(10)(a)(iii) inserted by Finance Act, 2010 and not 31.03.2010 as held by the AO. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assesee has declared the profit of the housing project based on the sale deeds executed during the year under appeal. The profit on sale of flats declared in the year in which the same were transferred by way of sale within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the decision of Coordinate Bench in the case of D.K. Construction vs. ACIT, 17 TTJ 1 (Indore) in support of the contention that the date of completion certificate is not crucial but date of completion is relevant. Therefore, he supported the order of ld. CIT (A). 3.3. In respect of the other objection, the ld. Counsel reiterated the submissions as made in the written brief. It is submitted that as regards the applicability of the provisions of section 80IB(10)(f) of the Act, the same are applicable only with effect from 01.04.2010 and the period involved in the assessment and appeal is 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010. As such the claim made by the assessee cannot be denied on the basis of provisions of section 80IB(10)(f) of the IT Act. It is contended that even if it is presumed that the AO is justified only for 4 flats of the total flats of 516 sold fall under clause (f), and these were all booked prior to insertion of clause (f) with effect from 01.04.2010. Therefore, it was contended that the ld. CIT (A) was justified in deleting the disallowance. 3.4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record. We find that the Asssessing Officer had denied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... using project has been, or, is approved by the local authority on or after the 1st day of April, 2004 but not later than the 31st day of March, 2005, within four years from the end of the financial year in which the housing project is approved by the local authority. (iii) In a case where a housing project has been approved by the local authority on or after the 1st day of April, 2005, within five years from the end of the financial year in which the housing project is approved by the local authority. Explanation- For the purposes of this clause,- (i) in a case where the approval in respect of the housing project is obtained more than once, such housing project shall be deemed to have been approved on the date of which the building plan of such housing project is first approved by the local authority; (ii) the date of completion of construction of the housing project shall be taken to be the date on which the completion certificate in respect of such housing project is issued by the local authority; (b) the project is on the size of a plot of land which has a minimum area of one acre: Provided that nothing contained in clause (a) or clause 9b) shall ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. It is observed by the ld.CIT (A) that as per the regulations governing the issuance of Completion Certificate, in case the assessee makes an application and the Completion Certificate is not issued within 30 days from the receipt of such application, the assessee would give a notice to the competent authority. After expiry of 15 days, it would be deemed that completion certificate has been issued. This fact is also not controverted by the revenue by placing any contrary material on record. Therefore, in our considered view the AO was not justified in declining the deduction on this ground. We, therefore, do not see any reason to interfere into the finding of ld. CIT (A). 3.6. Another objection of the AO was that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 80IB(10(f). It is pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee that this provision came into effect from w.e.f. 01.04.2010 whereas the flats were sold in between 01.04.2009 and 31.03.2010. Therefore, the provisions were not applicable. The ld. CIT (A) has also recorded this fact in his order. The fact that the provisions of section 80IB(10(f) was introduced in the Statute Book with effect from 01.04.2010. Therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The ld. Counsel further submitted that in the case of Mahak Mehta, it is not a case of non-deduction of tax, as tax has been deducted from the payment made, but at a lower rate than applicable. Thus, the provisions of section.40(a)(ia) are not attracted, and the disallowance made by the ld. AO has been rightly deleted by the ld. CIT (A). This contention of the assessee gets support from the following cases : DCIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal ( 46 Taxmann.com 444 (Kol.) ACIT vs. M/s. M.C. Sharma Associates (ITA No. 1028/JP/2011). The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee has filed the copies of ITR and computation of income showing the consultancy charges received from the assessee and the tax paid on it. Thus in this case, low deduction of tax by the assessee has not lead to any loss to the revenue, in so far as the payee has paid full tax on the said receipt. In case of M/s. Tata Motor Finance, the ld. Counsel submitted that it is a concern working on national level and not a case of small assessee indulging in tax evasion. It is undoubtedly assessed to income tax. Therefore, the interest paid by the assessee is automatically subject to tax. The main purpose for bringing th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come under section139; (ii) has taken into account such sum for computing income in such return of income; and (iii) has paid the tax due on the income declared by him in such return of income, stand fulfilled in both the cases. In view of this the assessee is not at default and therefore provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable. In view of the above, the ld. Counsel submitted that the Assessing Officer was not justified in disallowing the payment of interest u/s 40(a)(ia). The addition made has been rightly deleted by the ld. CIT (A), and prays that the same may kindly be upheld. 4.2. On the contrary, the ld. D/R opposed the submissions. 4.3. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld. CIT (A) has deleted the addition by taking into consideration the judgment of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Ltd., 357 ITR 642 (All.). It is also observed that the ratio of judgment of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court (supra) has also been followed by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the cases of Girdhari Lal Bargoti (ITA No. 757 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
