9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 229 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IB(10) - proportionate deduction - AO was of the opinion that since the project was not completed in its entirety till 31.03.2012, the condition stipulated u/s 80IB(10) has been violated - CIT(A) allowed the claim - HELD THAT - Issue is squarely covered by the judgment delivered by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. B.M. Bros., 2013 (10) TMI 290 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT wherein the identical situation of the assessee's claimed u/s 80IB(10) was allowed with respect to only those units of the 'housing project', which were approved and construction have been completed prior to 31.03.2008. No justification in interfering with the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing the claim of deduction under Section 80IB(10) on the units which are mentioned in the permissions issued by BU certifying completion as made by the assessee without any ambiguity so as to warrant interference. Hence, the Revenue's appeal is, thus, dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Detailed Analysis: Issue: Entitlement to deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Facts: - The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in real estate, filed its returns for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15, claiming a deduction under Section 80IB(10) amounting to Rs. 42,52,86,128/- for the Atlantis Park project. - The project had 1140 units, but the completion certificate was issued for only 876 units by 31.03.2012, within the stipulated five-year period from the project approval date of 30.03.2007. Assessment Officer (AO) Findings: - The AO disallowed the deduction under Section 80IB(10) on the grounds that the entire project was not completed by 31.03.2012, thus violating the conditions stipulated under the section. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] Findings: - The CIT(A) allowed the deduction, stating that the appellant rightly claimed the deduction for the blocks for which BU permission was received before the prescribed date. The CIT(A) relied on the Pune Tribunal judgment in M/s. Sai Siddhi Atul and other relevant cases. Tribunal Findings: - The Tribunal noted that the issue was covered by the jurisdictional High Court judgment in CIT vs. B.M. & Bros., where deduction under Section 80IB(10) was allowed for units completed before the stipulated date. - The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had rightly allowed the deduction based on various precedents, including decisions from the Pune ITAT in cases like Rahul Construction Co., Anand Ashok Gandhi, Satyanarayan Ramswarup Agarwal, and M/s. Varun Developers. - The Tribunal emphasized that the legislative intent behind Section 80IB(10) should be construed liberally to promote economic growth, and proportionate deduction should be allowed for completed units even if the entire project was not completed. Conclusion: - The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing the deduction under Section 80IB(10) for the units completed within the stipulated period, and dismissed the Revenue's appeal for both AY 2013-14 and 2014-15. Combined Result: - Both appeals by the Revenue were dismissed, affirming the appellant's entitlement to the deduction under Section 80IB(10).
|
