2017 (11) TMI 1127 - AT - Income Tax

Claim of exemption under section 80-IB(10) - disallowance of income earned from Emerald Park Annex Project, on the ground that each unit exceeded the area of 1,500 square feet - Held that - The assessee fairly admitted that the issue is squarely covered by the orders passed by the ITAT in the assessee s own case for the earlier assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11. Under these circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and accordingly reject the grounds urged by the assessee. Applicability of the provisions of section 14A - Held that - We are of the view that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in applying the provisions of section 14A in the instant case despite the fact that there is no exempt income earned by the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Barred appeal by Revenue due to limitation.
2. Eligibility to claim exemption under section 80-IB(10).
3. Applicability of provisions of section 14A of the Act.

Issue 1: The appeal filed by the Revenue was barred by limitation by 101 days. The counsel for the assessee pointed out that as the tax effect was less than ?10 lakhs, the Revenue should not have preferred an appeal according to the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The Department sought to withdraw the appeal, and the Tribunal permitted the Revenue to do so, dismissing the appeal without delving into the reasons for the delay.

Issue 2: The appeal by the assessee focused on the eligibility to claim exemption under section 80-IB(10) of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim regarding income from a specific project due to unit size exceeding the prescribed limit. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld this decision based on previous tribunal orders. The Tribunal, finding the issue covered by earlier tribunal decisions, rejected the grounds raised by the assessee.

Issue 3: The applicability of section 14A of the Act was disputed by the assessee, arguing no exempt income was earned from investments during the year. The Tribunal noted that for section 14A to apply, earning income in the relevant year is a prerequisite. The Commissioner's decision to apply section 14A was deemed erroneous as there was no exempt income earned by the assessee. Relying on tribunal decisions and a Delhi High Court case, the Tribunal allowed the grounds raised by the assessee regarding section 14A.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by the assessee while dismissing the appeal by the Revenue, which was withdrawn. The judgment clarified the issues of limitation, exemption eligibility under section 80-IB(10), and the applicability of section 14A of the Act, providing detailed analysis and legal reasoning for each aspect.