9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (6) TMI 1031 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of deduction claimed 80-IB(10) in respect of Guru Shikhar Housing Project -non-fulfilment of the conditions specified in section 80IB(10)(a)(iii), (e) & (f) by assessee - Held that - As decided in earlier AYs wherein held that as the assessee has itself reached out to the JDA which establishes beyond any doubt that the project area falls within the jurisdiction and the authority of JDA and it is JDA which is to approve the building plan and issuance of the completion certificate. In light of above, we are of the considered view that housing project falls with the Jaipur region and the JDA is the approving authority for development and construction of the housing projects and it shall be the local authority for the purposes of claim of deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Act. Also as the construction has been completed and completion certificate has been issued by JDA in respect of block H & I. Accordingly, the assessee shall be eligible to claim proportionate deduction u/s 80IB(10) in respect of Block H & I. And the matter require to be setaside to the file of AO for fresh examination so that all relevant facts and documents are brought on record to determine the actual date of completion of blocks A to G
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2011-12 and A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Disallowance of deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2012-13. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance of Deduction Claimed under Section 80-IB(10): The Revenue challenged the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding the disallowance of deductions claimed under section 80-IB(10) for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The AO had disallowed the claim for the 'Guru Shikhar' Housing Project, citing non-fulfillment of conditions specified in section 80-IB(10)(a)(iii), (e), and (f) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had allowed the deduction based on the principle of consistency, as the facts of the case remained the same as in earlier years. The Tribunal noted that the issues were already covered in the assessee’s favor by its own decision dated 24.01.2017 for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11. The Tribunal reiterated its previous findings, which addressed several key points: - The Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) is the local authority responsible for approving the housing project and issuing completion certificates. - If the application for the completion certificate is made within the prescribed time, any delay in issuing the certificate should relate back to the date of the application. - Each block of the housing complex should be considered separately for ascertaining the completion date. - Proportionate deduction should be allowed if some flats do not fulfill the allotment conditions, rather than disallowing the entire deduction. The Tribunal found that the construction of blocks H & I was completed by 31.03.2012, and the delay in issuing the completion certificate by JDA should not penalize the assessee. The Tribunal directed the AO to determine the actual date of completion for blocks A to G and to allow proportionate deductions for blocks H & I. Consequently, the ground taken by the Revenue regarding the claim of deduction under section 80-IB(10) was partly allowed for statistical purposes. 2. Disallowance of Deduction under Section 36(1)(va): For A.Y. 2012-13, the Revenue also challenged the deletion of an addition of ?51,764 made under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act. The AO had disallowed this amount as it represented employee contributions towards ESI/PF not paid within the stipulated time. However, the CIT(A) deleted the addition, citing that these contributions were paid before the due date of filing the return of income under section 139(1). The CIT(A) relied on the decisions of the Rajasthan High Court, which held that such payments, if made before the due date of filing the return, cannot be disallowed under section 43B or section 36(1)(va). The Tribunal reviewed the CIT(A)’s order and found no infirmity, thus dismissing the Revenue’s ground on this issue. Conclusion: Both appeals filed by the Revenue were partly allowed for statistical purposes, with the Tribunal directing the AO to re-examine specific aspects of the case related to the completion of the housing project and the eligibility for deductions under section 80-IB(10). The disallowance under section 36(1)(va) was upheld in favor of the assessee.
|
