Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds CIT(A)'s order on section 80IB(10) deduction, rejects retroactive application</h1> <h3>The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Varun Developers</h3> The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Varun Developers - TMI Issues Involved:1. Deduction under section 80IB(10) for incomplete housing project.2. Deduction under section 80IB(10) for partially completed housing projects.3. Applicability of amended sub-section (f) to section 80IB(10).4. Allotment of multiple flats to related individuals and its impact on deduction under section 80IB(10).Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deduction under section 80IB(10) for incomplete housing project:The Revenue contended that the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in allowing the deduction under section 80IB(10) to the housing project Harsh Paradise, which was approved on 28.05.2003 and was incomplete by 31.03.2008. The project consisted of four buildings (H-1, H-2, H-3, and G) and another building H-4, which was not completed due to the inability to acquire Transferable Development Rights (TDR). The completion certificates for the completed buildings were received before the stipulated date, but the project was deemed incomplete as the H-4 building was not finished.The Tribunal found that the issue was covered in favor of the assessee by previous orders for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. It was held that the assessee was entitled to the deduction for the completed buildings (H-1, H-2, H-3, and G) as they met the conditions prescribed under section 80IB(10). The Tribunal emphasized that the law should be interpreted liberally to promote economic growth and should not penalize the assessee for incomplete portions due to circumstances beyond their control.2. Deduction under section 80IB(10) for partially completed housing projects:The Revenue argued that the deduction should not be allowed on a standalone basis for partially completed projects. However, the Tribunal held that the completed buildings (H-1, H-2, H-3, and G) were eligible for the deduction under section 80IB(10) as they were completed within the stipulated time and met all the necessary conditions. The Tribunal relied on the decision in the case of Brigade Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., which supported the claim of deduction for completed portions of the project.3. Applicability of amended sub-section (f) to section 80IB(10):The Revenue contended that the amendment to sub-section (f) to section 80IB(10), effective from 01.04.2009, should apply to the assessee's case. The amendment introduced restrictions on the allotment of multiple residential units to related individuals. The assessee argued that the booking of the second flat occurred before the introduction of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009.The Tribunal found that the Finance Bill was introduced on 06-07-2009 and passed on 19-08-2009, while the booking of the second flat occurred in June 2009. Therefore, the amended provisions could not apply retroactively to transactions completed before the amendment. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing the deduction as the transaction was completed before the amendment.4. Allotment of multiple flats to related individuals and its impact on deduction under section 80IB(10):The Revenue argued that the assessee violated section 80IB(10)(f) by allotting two flats to members of the same family, thereby disqualifying the deduction. The Tribunal noted that the second flat was booked and the agreement was executed before the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 was passed. The Tribunal held that the amended provisions could not be applied to transactions completed before their introduction and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow the deduction.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s order, allowing the deduction under section 80IB(10) for the completed portions of the housing project and rejecting the applicability of the amended provisions to transactions completed before their introduction.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found