9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2007-08 which has been upheld by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court vide order dated 05/05/2015 (2015 (6) TMI 460 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ), we set aside the orders of lower authorities and allow the claim of assessee on this issue. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.3043/Ahd/2011 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2015 - Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav and Shri Anil Chaturvedi, JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri S. N. Soparkar, AR For the Respondent : Shri B. L. Yadav, Sr.DR ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) dated 01/09/2011 for AY 2008-09 on the following grounds:- 1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 6. Levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C 234D of the Act is not justified. 7. Initiation of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act is not justified. 2. The assessee in its return of income has claimed deduction under section 80IB(10) which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee was not the owner of the property and the permission was not granted in the assessee s name. The approval by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation was in the name of the original land owners and not in the name of assessee developer and as per the Assessing Officer the original land owner had merely obtained the services of assessee firm for development and construction of the project. The Assessing Officer observed that the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s segment of the project. In such a situation, since residential unit segment is being treated on a standalone basis for eligibility to deduction under section 80IB(10), the eligibility for such deduction can only be for the profits which are in respect of residential unit segment of the overall project, because, in the light of the discussions, only that part of the overall project can be said to be housing project. Accordingly, eligibility for deduction under section 80IB(10) must remain confined to the same. There cannot be any quarrel with this finding. If the completed portion, on stand alone basis, fulfils all the criteria of a housing project, it would get the benefit i.e. the completed area should be completely delinked conce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... now in appeal before us. 4. Before us the ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA No.3377/Ahd/2010 for AY 2007-08. He submitted a copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 14/08/2014 which is placed on record. He also submitted that the view taken by the Tribunal has been upheld in favour of the assessee by the Ho ble Gujarat High Court vide its order in Tax Appeal No.107 of 2015, dated 05/05/2015. A copy of the order of Hon ble High Court has also been placed on record. Therefore, he submitted that the present issue be decided accordingly in view of the above decisions. The ld. DR on the other hand supported the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ara 6, the learned tribunal has observed and held as under :- 6. We find that in the instant case, the housing project was approved on 10.03.2004 by the competent authority. The above fact is not in dispute. On the above fact, as per the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. CHD Developers (supra), the condition for obtaining completion certificate within four years of the date of approval for being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) is not applicable. The Departmental Representative could not point out any good reason as to why the aforesaid decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court should not be followed in the instant case. 2.07 In the case of CIT vs. Tarnetar Corporation, reported in (2014) 363 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed. 6. The facts are similar in the present case. So, we agree with the submissions of ld. counsel for the assessee that the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) in absence of project completion certificate from VMSS in totality because the project was completed within four years, the time prescribed. The CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action of A.O. when the assessee not only submitted the project completion report but also paid drainage and water line connections to the local authority within the time limit prescribed under the Act. Following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for AY 2007-08 which has been upheld by Hon ble Gujarat High Court vide order dated 05/05/2015 (supra), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
