9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... res that in preceding as well as the impugned assessment year, the Assessing Officer had made disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB(10) qua the very project Chettinadd Enclave sought to have been developed by the assessee on similar analogy of reasons (supra). We find from the tribunal s order that similar grounds were raised wherein issue of deduction stands decided in favour of the assessee. In these circumstances, by following the order of the tribunal in assessee s own case for the very project in the nature of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act , we see no reason to adopt a different view in the impugned assessment year. Consequently, the CIT(A) s findings are affirmed. - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A. No. 1755/Mds/2013 - - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned deduction. Therefore, he disallowed the claim, inter alia, by observing that if all space within the compound wall of a housing unit is taken as private space , then the built-up area would exceed the statutory limit of 1500 sq ft, the plot in question had five layout approvals, first one of them stipulated completion of project by 31.3.2008 whereas the project had been completed by the assessee only by 31.3.2011 and a part of land had also been added to the plot in question later on. The third and last reason stated in the assessment order reads that in Assessing Officer s opinion, since the assessee was only a works contractor and not a developer in view of the fact that the residential units had been sold by the concerned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... including residential purposes. 2.6. The learned CIT(A) ought to have noted that built-up area , for the purposes of Sec.80IB(10), means the inner measurements of the residential units at the floor level and includes the projections and balconies. 2.7. The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee initially obtained building plan approval, only, for three houses comprising an area of 5988 sq. ft. of land and hence, the housing project is on an area of less than one acre of land. 2.8. The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the housing project approval date, referred in Sec.80IB(10)(a), is the layout approval date and not the building plan approval date . 2.9. The learned CIT(A) failed to note that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
