9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber . This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad, dated 1st March, 2013 in appeal No.CIT(A)- XV/ITO9(2)/405/2010-11, passed against order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the IT Act, 2916 (in short the Act) framed on 31/12/2010 by ITO Wd-9(2), Ahmedabad. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- 1. The order of Assessment passed U/S 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the I.T. Act is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the law, equity and natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT(A). has erred in law and on facts in Upholding the order of the Ld. A.O. of disallowance of claim made u/s 80IB of IT. Act, 1961 for ₹ 36,08,678/-. 3. That the construction of the Residential Units in the housing project fulfil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... total income at ₹ 3,94,680/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act of ₹ 36,08,678/- in respect of profits derived from development of building housing projects. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.01.2006 determining income of ₹ 453675/-. 3. Subsequently an order u/s 263 of the Act was passed on 14.2.2007 setting aside the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 27.1.2006 with the direction to examine the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act was finalized on 18.5.2007 after disallowing the deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act at ₹ 36,08,678/-. On appeal ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim for dedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Developers (supra). 7. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the orders of lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. Through this appeal assessee has challenged the legality of the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Act, secondly against the order of ld. CIT(A) upholding the order of Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act wherein disallowance of claim u/s 80IB(10) of the Act for ₹ 36,08,678/- has been made. We observe that ld. AR has referred and relied on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case for Asst. Year 2004-05 wherein reference has been given to the order of Coordinate Bench in the case of Radhe Developers. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordance with law. 9. We further observe that in the case of Radhe Developers in ITA No.2482/Ahd/2006 others dated 29.6.2007, the Tribunal has settled the issue of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act and relevant observation from this order is as under :- 44. As discussed above and in view of the case law of the Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Minerals Lt (supra) wherein it has been categorically observed as regards to ownership that anyone in possession of property in his own title exercising such dominion over the property as would enable others being excluded there from and having the right to use and occupy the property and/or to enjoy right would be owner of the building though a formal deed of title might not have been exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
