TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the building was completed on 31.03.2013 and occupation in respect of all the blocks of the project were obtained within the stipulated time limit on 31.03.2013. There being no violation of any of the conditions mentioned in Section 80IB(10)of the Act, the above claim of the respondent-assessee was allowed by the Tribunal. When the completion / occupation certificate was handed over to the respondent-assessee, the same was produced before the Tribunal. We see no harm in the Tribunal taking cognizance of this certificate. In so far reference to Rules 29 and 30 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 is concerned, it is trite that rules and procedures are the handmaid of justice which are required to be applied to advance t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its satisfaction, in violation of Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Tribunal erred in law by not setting aside the assessment to the file of the Assessing Officer for examination of additional evidence produced by the assessee before the Tribunal ? 4. Basic objections of Mr.Walve, learned standing counsel is that Tribunal did not follow the procedure laid down in Rules 29 and 30 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 vide accepting additional evidence adduced by the respondent-assessee. He has also referred to the provisions contained in Section 143(2) of the Act to contend that if at all Tribunal desired to have the additional evidence, respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roduce the completion / occupation certificate within the stipulated time limit i.e. on or before 31.03.2013. Before the appellate authority also, the said certificate was not produced. Accordingly, by the appellate order dated 01.01.2014, the first appellate authority held that the respondent-assessee was not entitled to get deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Act. 8. Respondent-assessee thereafter preferred further appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal noted that respondent-assessee had furnished the commencement certificate issued by the Bombay Municipal Corporation dated 10.09.2007 and, occupation certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai dated 26.02.2013, besides other documents which clearly shows that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
