TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proportionate basis. For this assessment year, the CIT (A) gave a finding, inter alia, that the project was designed as a composite project at the proposed site at Survey No.486/1 and 482 at New Secretariat Colony, Velachery, Chennai. The project of the assessee was also in an area of more than one acre. The approvals were also obtained on unit basis only for the benefit of taking advantage of the relevant rules of the Local Authority. Further, from the order of the CIT (A), it is apparent that he had arrived at the conclusion in favour of the assessee after considering the facts of the case and the decision of various higher judiciaries on the identical issue etc. On identical facts and circumstances, this Tribunal allowed the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) has allowed the assessee s claim for AY 2007-08, apart from the reasons mentioned in AY 2007-08, the AO denied the assessee s claim of deduction, inter alia, for the reason that the assessee had obtained approval for construction from the competent authority for each block separately at different point of time and it was not a composite project comprised in a area of one acre as envisaged in the section. 3. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before the Ld CIT (A) and the CIT (A) allowed the appeal. 4. Aggrieved against the order of the Ld CIT (A), the Revenue filed this appeal with the following Grounds of Appeal:- 1. The order of the Ld CIT (A) is contrary to law and facts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s at (a) New Secretariat Colony, 4th Street, Velachery, Chennai 600 042 and (b) Gangai Nagar, 1st Main road, Velachery, Chennai 600 042. 3. The CMDA approval for the plot at Sl No. (1) bearing Survey No.486/1 is obtained for an area admeasuring 27,039.21 sq ft and the plot at Sl No. (2) bearing Survey No. 482 is obtained for an area admeasuring 31,798.80 sq ft. All the other plant approvals from Sl No. 3 to Sl No. 16 are construction approvals in the above said 2 plots. 4. For claim of deduction u/s 80IB-(10) of the IT Act. 1961, Clause (b) to subsection 10 to section 80IB clearly stipulates that the project is on the size of a plot of land which has a minimum area of one acre . It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ionate deduction only for those residential units which do not exceed 1500 sq ft. 6. It is comprehended that the additional evidence submitted by the assessee before the Ld CIT (A) as per Rule 46A have not come to her rescue, but substantiated that the assessee is eligible for claim deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The issue is similar for the AYs 2009-10 and 2007-08, wherein the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IB(10) for those years too. 6. The Ld Departmental Representative presented his case on the lines of the Grounds of Appeal and Additional Grounds of Appeal. 7. Per contra, the Ld Authorised Representative inviting our attention to the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in favour of the assessee after considering the facts of the case and the decision of various higher judiciaries on the identical issue. Therefore, in these circumstances we do not find it necessary to interfere in this order. Hence, the Revenue s appeal is devoid of merits. It is ordered accordingly. and submitted that since the same project continues from AY 2007-08 onwards, and since the earlier appeals were decided in its favour, the Revenue s appeal may be dismissed. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act for the same project from the AY 2007-08 onwards. This Tribunal has allowed the assessee s claim for the AY 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
