9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against order of Ld. CIT(A) XV, Ahmedabad for assessment year 2007-08 regarding deduction u/s. 80IB(10) and status of the assessee as a developer.
Issue 1: Deduction u/s. 80IB(10) The revenue appealed against the order directing the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction claimed by the assessee of Rs. 51,18,200 u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the deduction based on the appellant's contribution towards land purchase and development costs, citing guidelines from a previous ITAT Bench decision. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s order to be cryptic and contradictory, noting discrepancies in the treatment of funds as deposits and advances while determining if the assessee practically purchased the land. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directing a fresh decision with a speaking and reasoned order after providing a fair hearing to both parties. Issue 2: Status of the Assessee The revenue contended that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions for claiming deduction u/s. 80IB(10) as the land was in the name of a separate legal entity, and the assessee was merely a contractor, not a developer. The Ld. CIT(A) found that the appellant's contribution towards land purchase and development costs indicated practical ownership and risk-bearing, thus qualifying for the deduction. The Tribunal acknowledged the contradictory nature of the CIT(A)'s observations but allowed the revenue's appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issue back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision. Judgment Summary: The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad heard the revenue's appeal against the Ld. CIT(A) XV, Ahmedabad's order for the assessment year 2007-08. The issues revolved around the deduction u/s. 80IB(10) and the status of the assessee as a developer. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the CIT(A)'s order regarding the deduction claimed by the assessee and the treatment of funds as deposits and advances. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision. The revenue's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for a speaking and reasoned order in the interest of justice.
|
