TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or to any noncompletion of constriction and, therefore, the claim of the assessee u/s 80IB could not be denied. Claim of the assessee of having completed the project comprising of building A, B and C was duly supported and substantiated by the details and documents furnished by the assessee and since the assessee had substantially complied with the requirement of section 80IB(10), the Assessing Officer was not justified in denying his claim for deduction under the said provisions merely on technical ground that the completion certificate was not issued by the local authority before the due date of completion. In this view of the matter, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the assessee of deduction u/s 80IB(10) in respect of the project comprising of building A, B and C and dismiss this appeal of the Revenue. - ITA No.920/PUN/2017 - - - Dated:- 9-9-2020 - Shri P.M. Jaagntda P, Vice President And Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Akash Romani For the Revenue : Shri Alok Malviya ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, VP: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), it was submitted on behalf of the assessee that all the flats in building A, B and C were sold out and possession of the same was also physically given to the flat owners before the due date of completion. It was also submitted that all the NOCs required for obtaining the completion certificate from the local authority were obtained by the assessee before the due date of completion and even the application for completion certificate was submitted by the assessee to the local authority well before the due date of completion. It was contended that the right to issue completion certificate was completely vested with the local authority and since the assessee had no direct or indirect control over it, his claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act could not be denied on this technical ground when sufficient evidence was placed on record by the assessee to show that the project was completed before the due date. In support of this contention, reliance was placed by the assessee on various judicial pronouncements wherein it was held that the requirement of formal issue of completion certificate from local authority within time period was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntives for promoting growth and development to be construed liberally. The same principle has been followed by the Jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs. ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 0390 (Pune), which in turn relied on the case of M/s. Hindustan Samuha Awas Ltd. vs. ITO wherein Assessee was allowed claim considering that (i) certificate of Architect confirming that construction was complete; and, (ii) application for obtaining Completion Certificate was moved before local authority before specified date. It was also noted that delay in issuing Completion Certificate was not attributable to Assessee or to any non-completion of construction . In the present case also the assessee applied for obtaining the Completion Certificate on 14.03.2012 which is before the stipulated date of completion. In view of this the denial of deduction u/s 80IB(10) by the AO on the issue of Completion Certificate cannot be upheld. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The ld. DR has strongly reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not issued by the local authority before due date of completion. He has contended that the requirement of formal issue of completion certificate by the local authority within the stipulated time period is not mandatory in nature as held by the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Tarnetar Corporation (supra) and since the requirements of section 80IB(10) were substantially satisfied by the assessee, he was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) in respect of the project comprising of building A, B and C as rightly held by the ld. CIT(A). He has contended that the matter relating to issue of completion certificate is completely vested with the local authority and since the assessee has no direct or indirect control over it, his claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10) cannot be denied for non-issuance of completion certificate by the local authority before due date of completion when the claim of the assessee of completion of building was duly supported and substantiated by the assessee. In support of this contention, he relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs. ACIT 159 TTJ 390 wherein similar claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IB w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... within the time period is not mandatory in nature and if the project is found to be completed within the time period on evidence, the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IB cannot be denied on this technical ground. In another case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs. ACIT (supra) cited by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, this Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IB on the basis of the certificate of Architect confirming the construction of building within the stipulated time and the fact that the application for obtaining completion certificate was moved by the assessee before the local authority well within the stipulated period. It was observed by the Tribunal that the delay in issuing of completion certificate by the local authority was not attributable to the assessee or to any noncompletion of constriction and, therefore, the claim of the assessee u/s 80IB could not be denied. 9. Having regard to the facts of the case as discussed above and keeping in view the decision of this Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Tarnetar Corporation (supra) as well as in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs. ACIT (supra), we are of the view that the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
