Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as a developer of a housing project even though the land was not registered in its name and the project was undertaken under development arrangements.
Analysis: The provision grants deduction to an undertaking engaged in developing and building approved housing projects and does not expressly make ownership of the land a condition precedent. The decisive inquiry is whether the assessee undertook the project at its own cost, risk, and control, as opposed to merely executing a works contract for fixed remuneration. On the facts, the assessee had full authority over development, bore the investment risk, and was entitled to the project benefits and surplus. The Court also treated the possession and development arrangements as sufficient, for income-tax purposes, to regard the assessee as the owner under the combined operation of Section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
Conclusion: The assessee was eligible for deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the Revenue's appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: For deduction under Section 80IB(10), ownership of the land is not a statutory prerequisite where the assessee is the real developer who undertakes the housing project at its own cost and risk and exercises effective control over the project.