9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding of 'Saket-Dham' also records the fact that the project has been developed on 1201 sq. mts. of land. This view of CIT has also been re-iterated by the Tribunal in the impugned order. In the above view, the submission of Mr. Shrivastava that the project was sanctioned by the Nagpur Municipal Corporation of 'Saket-Dham' on a land of 4047 sq. mts. cannot be accepted, as it was not even brought on record before the Authorities under the Act. There is nothing on record to indicate that before the Tribunal, the aforesaid submission was even made by the appellant-assessee. Therefore, in the above view, the concrete findings by the two authorities on facts cannot even be said to be perverse in any manner. So far as the submission of appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 80-IB(10) of the Act in an order passed under Section 263 of the Act. 2. This appeal was admitted on 14th June, 2013 on the following substantial questions of law : 1. Whether in the quantem appeal the Income Tax Commissioner was justified in concluding that the assessee is not entitled to benefits under Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as he had developed project on less than one acre of land? 2. Whether disallowance of said benefit in Section 263 proceedings was warranted? 3. This appeal relates to Assessment year 2004-2005. For the subject assessment year, the appellant-assessee filed a return of income claiming exemption of ₹ 57,82,825/- under Section 80- IB(10) of the Actas profits earned b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exact area of plot as only 1201 sq. mts. Further, the sale-deeds of the flats in 'Saket- Dham' project also state that the assessee-appellant had developed the project 'Saket-Dham' only on the land of 1201 sq. mts. Thus, the order of the CIT directed the Assessing Officer to compute the tax payable by the appellant-assessee after addition of ₹ 57,82,825 to the income earlier assessed of ₹ 80,92,870/-. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of CIT, the appellantassessee filed an appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order the Tribunal on examination of facts also concluded that necessary pre-condition of the project being on land of one acre or more was not satisfied in this case to avail of Section 80-IB(10) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act should have been granted. Thus, on these facts the disallowance by the CIT (A) was not warranted. 7. We find that two authorities viz. the CIT as well as the Tribunal have concurrently come to the conclusion that the project of 'Saket-Dham' in respect of which exemption is claimed under Section 80-IB(10) of the Act was a project constructed on 1201 sq. mts. This findings of fact by the two authorities is on the basis of the sanction dated 02.01.2003 issued by the Municipal Corporation in respect of the construction of 'Saket-Dham' stating that the same is on land having an area of 1201 sq. mts. Further, the agreement of sale of flats entered into by the appellantassessee in building of 'Saket-Dham' als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
