9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (8) TMI 417 - AT - Income TaxDenial of benefit of sec. 80IB(10) Held that - Assessee made the contribution of his capital in the shape of land and incurred the initial expenses for development and building of housing project like sanction of plan, getting the electricity and water connection by making the payments to BWSSB and KEB etc. Therefore, merely on this basis that the assessee did not construct himself was not a ground to deny the deduction u/s 80IB(10), particularly when the assessee had undertaken the other work like making the land useful by getting it converted into non agricultural purpose and getting plan sanctioned - assessee contributed the land, undertook the developmental activities in the said land and thus complied with all other conditions which have to be fulfilled before claiming the benefit u/s 80IB(10) of the Act - assessee entitled for the benefit of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act
Issues Involved:
1. Denial of deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Interpretation of the terms "developing and building" in the context of section 80IB(10). 3. Assessment of the assessee's role in the development and construction of the housing project. 4. Evaluation of the Joint Development Agreement and its implications on the eligibility for deduction. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Denial of Deduction under Section 80IB(10): The primary issue revolves around the denial of the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee, a proprietor of M/s Bilad Builders & Developers, filed a return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 88,28,640/- and claimed a deduction of Rs. 1,72,20,784/- under section 80IB(10). The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed this deduction on the grounds that the assessee had only contributed land for the housing project and had not engaged in any construction activity, thus not meeting the eligibility criteria for the deduction. 2. Interpretation of the Terms "Developing and Building": The AO's interpretation was that section 80IB(10) applies only to an undertaking involved in both developing and constructing the housing project. The AO argued that the deduction should not be allowed as the assessee did not carry out any construction activity and merely transferred the land to M/s Reddy Structures Pvt. Ltd. for joint development. However, the assessee contended that section 80IB(10) does not require the assessee to carry out the construction himself and that developing and building a housing project includes obtaining statutory approvals and other developmental activities. 3. Assessment of the Assessee's Role in Development and Construction: The assessee argued that he was a joint developer along with M/s Reddy Structures Pvt. Ltd. and had incurred significant expenses for obtaining statutory approvals necessary for the project. The assessee provided evidence of payments made to BWSSB and KEB for electricity and water connections, asserting that these activities were part of the development process. The assessee also highlighted that he had converted agricultural land into non-agricultural land and then into stock-in-trade for the project, indicating active involvement in the development. 4. Evaluation of the Joint Development Agreement: The Joint Development Agreement (JDA) between the assessee and M/s Reddy Structures Pvt. Ltd. was scrutinized to determine the nature of the assessee's involvement. The agreement specified that the assessee contributed the land as capital and was responsible for obtaining statutory approvals, while M/s Reddy Structures Pvt. Ltd. was to invest in the construction. The agreement indicated that the assessee retained a 24% share of the built-up area and car parking, while the remaining 76% was allocated to the developer. This arrangement demonstrated that the assessee was not merely a land contributor but an active participant in the development process. Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the assessee was indeed involved in the development and building of the housing project, as evidenced by his contributions and responsibilities outlined in the JDA. The Tribunal referenced the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's judgment in the case of CIT v. Shravanee Constructions, which supported the view that an undertaking involved in the development and building of a housing project is eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10), even if the construction is carried out by another party. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and directed the AO to allow the deduction under section 80IB(10) to the assessee. Judgment: The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the deduction under section 80IB(10) was granted.
|
