9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vandana Properties [ 2012 (4) TMI 54 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] had come across an instance wherein all the project amenities had already been completed (in towers A to D) before the said assessee sought 80IB(10) qua E building as the eligible residential project. We reiterate that the factual position is just the opposite before us since this taxpayer has failed to prove that its C to F wings had been completed along with all the foregoing amenities; before the date of part completion certificate dated 29-03-2012 (supra). AR sought to draw support from the Municipal Corporation s subsequent approval to the completed project on 28-07-2014 that the assessee had duly complied with all the requirements of the entire project. We are afraid that this latter completion would hardly help the assessee once he is supposed to complete C to F wings to make them habitable before 29-03-2012 only. We thus find merit in the Revenue s sole substantive grievance seeking to revive this 80IB(10) disallowance pertaining to Green Lands project - It s instant first appeal succeeds. - ITA No. 576/PUN/2020 IT(SS)A Nos. 02 & 03/PUN/2021 - - - Dated:- 20-9-2022 - SHRI S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 27.08.2014. Since the appellant could not complete the entire project before 31.03.2012, it claimed proportionate deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act in respect of profits earned from Building Nos. C, D, E F. It is stated that the profits earned from Building Nos. A, B G and Commercial building were offered for tax without claiming any deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act in the respective assessment years. However, the A.O. did not allow the proportionate deduction claimed by the appellant in respect of Building Nos. C, D, E F. The A.O. also held that there is no ambiguity in the provisions of Section 80IB(10) regarding completion of project.lt is further seen from the assessment order, that the AO also disallowed the claim for another reason, i.e. on grounds of violation of provisions of Section 80IB(10)(f) of the Act. The A.O. in para 6 of his assessment order, has observed that the appellant had sold two flats in Building 'C' (i.e. Flat No.1001 1101) to Smt. Seema Devdas Shetty and Shri. Devidas P. Shetty, respectively. As both these persons were found to be spouse of each other, the A.O held that the appellant had violated the provisions of Section 80IB(10)(f) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 6. The aforesaid decision of the Tribunal has not been set aside, stayed or over-ruled by Higher Judicial Authorities. Before us, Revenue has also not placed any material on record to point out any distinguishing feature in the facts of the present case and that of earlier year nor has placed any contrary binding decision in its support. We therefore following the decision of Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in A.Y. 2011-12 and for similar reasons find no reason to interfere with the order of Ld.CIT(A) and thus the grounds of the Revenue are dismissed. 8. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT, Pune, in the above case, it is held that the appellant is entitled to deduction u/s 80IB(10) on the buildings completed within the prescribed time limit. However, the deduction claimed is subject to the discussion that follows in the ensuing paras. 9. Regarding the second issue of making disallowance u/s.80IB(10)(f) of the Act for allotting flats to the spouses, it is seen that the same is again directly covered by the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Pune in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consequently, upholding the said directions, we dismiss the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. 10. The facts in the case of the appellant are identical to the case of Narmada Developers cited above. Respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional I TAT, Pune, in the case of Narmada Developers (supra), it is held, that the appellant is entitled to claim prorata deduction on the profits of balance project excluding two flats which were allotted to the spouses. Accordingly, the AO is directed to verify the correctness of profits worked out by the appellant on sale of above said flats and disallow the deduction only to that extent. Ground No. 1 is allowed subject to these directions. 5. Suffice to say, the dispute between the parties herein is regarding the assessee s claim u/s.80IB(10) deduction vis- -vis the completion of the corresponding residential project namely Green Lands . We make it clear that the assessee s instant project got first approval by the concerned authorities on 30-03-2007. Meaning thereby that the scheduled date of completion thereof would be 30-03-2012 u/s. 80IB(10) Explanation (i) of the Act. The assessee s case all along ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d-alone basis. 7. All these assessee s arguments failed to evoke our concurrence. We wish to clarify here that hon ble apex court s recent decisions in Pr.CIT Vs. Wipro Limited (2022) 140 taxmann.com 223 (SC), Commissioner of Customs Vs.M/s. Dilip Kumar and Company (2018) 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) and CIT Vs. G.M. Knitting Industries Limited (2015) 376 ITR 456 (SC) have settled the law that provisions in a taxing statute; including deductions, ought to be strictly interpreted. We keep in mind this settled proposition and note that their lordships in Vandana Properties (supra) had come across an instance wherein all the project amenities had already been completed (in towers A to D) before the said assessee sought 80IB(10) qua E building as the eligible residential project. We reiterate that the factual position is just the opposite before us since this taxpayer has failed to prove that its C to F wings had been completed along with all the foregoing amenities; before the date of part completion certificate dated 29-03-2012 (supra). 8. Learned authorised representative further sought to draw support from the Municipal Corporation s subsequent approval to the completed project on 28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
