TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 964X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 80IB(10) - HELD THAT:- A plain reading of the said section does not support that interpretation at all. Learned Counsel for the appellant would have been perfectly justified, had the legislature in its wisdom, in clause c used the words each residential unit has a maximum built-up area . This would then clearly indicate that the intention was to ensure that each and every residential unit in such a housing project confirms inter alia to the size prescribed with a view to make an assessee eligible for claiming the deduction. It is a well settled principle of interpretation of statutes that when the language of a statute is unambiguous and admits of only one meaning, no question of construction of a statute then arises. Reliance in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-12. By virtue of the order impugned, the ITAT, while allowing the appeal of the assessee has directed the Assessing Officer (for short A.O. ) to workout the pro rata deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Act, 1961. 2. Briefly stated material facts in the backdrop of which the present controversy has arisen, are as under: The assessee is a firm engaged in the business of developing residential projects in Pune. Returns of income for the assessment year 2011-12 was fled on 30th September, 2011, declaring a total income of Rs.18,83,540/- after claiming deduction of Rs.28,49,87,583/- under Section 80IB(10) of the Act, 1961. The deduction claimed was in respect of two projects namely (A) Kumar Shantiniketan and (B) Kumar Kruti. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee. In the backdrop of the aforementioned facts, the following substantial question of law is proposed. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee s claim of deduction under Section 80IB(10) on pro rata basis considering the fact that the assessee did not comply with the limit on built-up area prescribed of Section 80IB(10)(c) of the Act in respect of eligible fats in the project Kumar Kruti and Kumar Shantiniketan ? 6. Mr. Samir G. Dalal, learned Counsel for the Respondent, however, stated that the issue is covered by a judgment of this Court in Devashri Nirman LLP V/s. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Another (2020) 429 ITR 597 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of Delhi or Mumbai in terms of Sub-clause c of Section 80IB(10) of the Act, 1961. 8. The argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant was that Section 80IB(10), does not at all envisage a pro rata deduction, in respect of eligible fats. In other words, it is suggested that even if a single fat in a housing project is found to exceed the permissible maximum built-up area of 1500 sq.ft., the assessee would lose its right to claim the benefit of deduction in respect of the entire housing project under Section 80IB(10). In our opinion, a plain reading of the said section does not support that interpretation at all. Learned Counsel for the appellant would have been perfectly justified, had the legislature in its wisdom, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
