M/s. Ashish Builders, Baroda V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-2(3), Baroda

ITA 277/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 80434 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 04-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROOP CHAND SR DR
• Keywords: Competent authority

Judgement Text

, , , , D, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, D BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'(, , , , )* + ) ' )* + ) ' )* + ) ' )* + ) ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.277/AHD/2011 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2006-2007] M/S.ASHISH BUILDERS 2, ANJALI PARK B/6. INDUCHACHA HOUSE CHHANI JAKATNAKA, BARODA. PAN : AAHFA 7899 J /VS. ITO, WARD-2(3) BARODA. ( (( ( -. -. -. -. / APPELLANT) ( (( ( /0 /0 /0 /0 -. -.-. -. / RESPONDENT) 1& 2 3 ) / ASSESSEE BY : SMT.URVASHI SODHAN + 2 3 ) / REVENUE BY : SHRI ROOP CHAND, SR.DR 5 2 &(* / DATE OF HEARING : 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 678 2 &(* / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/10/2014 )9 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2006-2007 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE CIT(A). 2. THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE APPELLANTS CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWING OF DEDUCTION U/S .80IB OF THE IT ACT, 1961 MADE BY ITO ON THE ERRONEOUS PLEA THAT PR OJECT DEVELOPED BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLE TO SUCH DEDUCTION. ITA NO.277/AHD/2011 -2- THE APPELLANT MOST HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT BOTH ON FACTS OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW THE DEDUCTION U/S.80IB (10) OF THE A CT IS ALLOWABLE SINCE ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THAT SECTION ARE FULFILLED FOR GRANTING THE SAID DEDUCTION AND IN VIEW THEREOF, TH E APPELLANT PRAYS THAT HONBLE TRIBUNAL BE PLEASED TO HOLD SO NOW AND GRANT THE SAME. 2. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF T HE APPELLANTS CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S.80 IB (10) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 MADE BY THE LD.ITO ON THE ERRONEOUS PLEA THAT THE AREA OF THE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION IN THE HOUSING PROJECTS EXCEEDS THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED IN THE SAID SECTION. THE APPELLANT MOST HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT BOTH ON FACTS OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW THE DEDUCTION U/S.80IB (10) OF THE A CT IS ALLOWABLE SINCE ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THAT SECTION ARE FULFILLED FOR GRANTING THE SAID DEDUCTION AND IN VIEW THEREOF, TH E APPELLANT PRAYS THAT HONBLE TRIBUNAL BE PLEASED TO HOLD SO NOW AND GRANT THE SAME. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVER ED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD B ENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSTT.YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06 AND S UBSEQUENT ASSTT.YEARS 2008-2009 IN ITA NO.821, 822 & 823/AHD/ 2012 ORDER DATED 14.6.2013, WHEREIN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN F AVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE OF DEDUC TION UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER ASSTT.YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06 AND ALSO SUBSEQUENT AS ST.YEAR 2008-09 DATED 14.6.2013(SUPRA) WHEREIN THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTI ON U/S.80IB(10) WAS ITA NO.277/AHD/2011 -3- DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HA S SUBMITTED THAT THE DEDUCTION RELATES TO SOME PROJECTS, AS IT WAS IN TH E EARLIER AS WELL AS IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE THE IR ORDER DATED 14.6.2013 (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FU LFILLED ALL THE CONDITIONS OF SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT AND THE AMENDMENT MA DE IN CLAUSE (D) AS HELD BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN MA NAN CORPORATION VS. ACIT, (2013) 29 TAXMANN.COM 15 (GUJ) FOR A.Y.2006-0 7 WAS NOT APPLICABLE ON THE PROJECT APPROVED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY BEFORE 1.4.2005, BY WHICH CERTAIN RIDERS FOR DEDUCTION HAV E BEEN IMPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE, AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS FULLY ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT. WE, BEING IN AG REEMENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL I N ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER AS WELL AS SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS (SUPRA), DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE GROUNDS OF THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( %&'( %&'( %&'( %&'( / ANIL CHATURVEDI) )* + )* + )* + )* + /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD