TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al assessment as 05/05/1999. Even if the date of approval is before 01/10/1998, it does not disentitle the assessee because the requirement of the section is that the eligible housing project has to be approved before 31/03/2007. The significance of 01/10/1998 is to examine the date of commencement of development and construction of the housing project, and in the present case it has been canvassed at 05/05/1999. The reasons recorded reflect that the Assessing Officer has confused the date of approval by the local authority with the date of commencement of development and construction of the housing project which are two different aspects. In any case, merely because the permission was given by CIDCO on 04/06/1998 cannot, by itself, be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in short the Act ). In order to appreciate the controversy we may refer to the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2005-06, which is directed against an order passed by CIT(A)-34, Mumbai dated 30/04/2012, which in turn, arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act dated 07/12/2010. 3. In brief, the relevant facts are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of Builders Developers and for the assessment year 2005-06 it filed a return of income originally on 31/10/2005 declaring a total income of ₹ 23,58,961/-, which, inter-alia, included claim of deduction under section 80 IB(10) of the Act with respect to the profits of certain projects. An assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns recorded by the Assessing Officer. In this context, our attention has been invited to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer on 19/05/2009, prior to issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, which reads as under:- Reasons for issue of Notice u/s. 148 of the I.T.Act. 19.5.2009 Perusal of the record show that assessee has claimed deduction u/s.80IB(10) to the tune of ₹ 47,26,054/- for A.Y.2005-06. The said deduction has been claimed in respect of project located at Village Achole,Tal Vasai, Dist.Thane (Shivam Nalasopara). It is seen that assessee has claimed deduction by submitting a false and apparently incorrect date for commencement of project as on 5.5.1999 in form 10CCB although assessee was full ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ission was given by CIDCO on 04/06/1998, which is well before 01/10/1998 . For the said reason, the Assessing Officer formed a belief that the claim of deduction under section 80 IB(10) of the Act has been wrongly allowed in the original assessment. Ostensibly the belief of the Assessing Officer is founded on the fact that the date of commencement of project canvassed by the assessee as 05/05/1999 is wrong because the development permission was given by CIDCO on 04/06/1998, which is pre- 01/10/1998. 6. Before we proceed to test the efficacy of the reason entertained by the Assessing Officer to form a belief for escapement of income, we may briefly touch upon the relevant legal position. Section 80 IB(10) of the Act, as it stood at the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of the section is that the eligible housing project has to be approved before 31/03/2007. The significance of 01/10/1998 is to examine the date of commencement of development and construction of the housing project, and in the present case it has been canvassed at 05/05/1999. The reasons recorded reflect that the Assessing Officer has confused the date of approval by the local authority with the date of commencement of development and construction of the housing project which are two different aspects. In any case, merely because the permission was given by CIDCO on 04/06/1998 cannot, by itself, be a basis to entertain a belief that the date of commencement of project adopted in the original assessment proceedings as 05/05/1999 is incorr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
