9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee in India during the period when appeal was to be filed within limitation period. It is contended that the assessee was travelling to USA and returned to India on 11-01-2014. The assessee has also filed a photocopy of the passport to substantiate his contentions. As per the contentions of the assessee the limitation for filing of the appeal ended on 28-12-2013, the assessee returned to India on 11-02-2014 and after returning back to India the assessee fell ill. The appeal could be filed only after the assessee recovered from illness. After perusal of the contents of the affidavit we are satisfied that the delay in filing of appeal is not deliberate or willful. The assessee has been able to explain the reason for delay in filing of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee submitted that the only reason for denying the benefit of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) to the assessee is that the completion certificate issued by the PCMC is after the last date i.e. 31-03-2009 as specified under clause (a) of section 80IB(10). The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the project was complete in all respect in December, 2008 itself. The ld. Counsel referred to the completion certificate issued by the Architect, placed at page 127 of the paper book. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee had applied for the completion certificate to the PCMC on 25-03-2009 i.e. before the last date of completion of project as envisaged u/s. 80IB(10)(a). The PCMC issued certificate on 30-11- 2009. The delay in issuance of certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and have perused the orders of the authorities below. We have also considered the documents which were referred during the course of making submissions by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and decision on which the reliance has been placed. The only issue raised in the appeal is with respect to disallowance of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) on the housing project 'Sanskriti' comprising of buildings D, E and G developed by the assessee. The reason for rejecting the claim of the assessee is that the project of the assessee is not complete within the specified time/due date in accordance with the clause (a) of section 80IB(10) of the Act. The initial certificate of commencement in respect of building D was issued by the PCMC on 21-04-2004. Accordingl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that it rendered the main provision nugatory? In our view, the explanation is introduced recently to put an end to a controversy, which might arise before the Assessing Officer about the date of completion. The intention of the legislature in providing explanation to fix the date of completion of a project is quite helpful when this provision is utilized in practice. In our view the explanation has introduced an unnecessarily strictness in the provision which is in the nature of exemption and not in the nature of charging. Sub-section (10) mentions that a housing project should be complete before 31.03.2008 so as to get the exemption. Completion of housing project is a physical act. It can be demonstrated on the spot and also through a cer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cordingly deposited on 31.03.2008. Thereafter, the certificate was issued in October, 2008. This delay cannot be attributed to the respondent assessee." 8. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 in the second round of litigation is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for final adjudication. Similar issue had come up before the Tribunal in assessment year 2008-09. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for deciding the matter afresh. A perusal of the order of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No. 625/PN/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09 decided on 31-07-2013 reveal that the claim of deduction u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee before the lower authorities. According to him, it was necessary to consider the claim of the assessee after admitting the following evidences as provided in Rule 29 of the ITAT rules 1963. (a) The certificate of the Architect of the appellant-assessee submitted to Local Authority approving the project certifying that the project was supervised by her and has been completed according to plans sanctioned being dt. 25-3-2009. (b)The Licence to work the Lift Location 223/1, 223/3, 228/5, 228/6 dt. 09-03-2009. (c) The Licence to work the Lift -A/ 4109/11/08, 228/5, 6 dt. 31-3-2009. (d) The Licence to work the Lift Location 223/2, 228/5, 228/6 dt.09-03-2009 A/4110/11/08. (e) The Licence to work the Lift. 228/5, 6 dt. 31-3-2009: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
