Housing project deduction and computer depreciation: later conditions cannot be imposed retrospectively, and integral peripherals qualify for higher rates.

Deduction under section 80IB(10) was stated to remain available for a housing project approved before a later amendment introducing a stricter completion-certificate condition, particularly where the built-up area requirement had already been found satisfied on the facts and the earlier view in the assessee's own case was followed for consistency. The text also states that non-filing or non-issuance of a completion certificate could not be used against the assessee when the project was otherwise completed and the amended condition was not in force at approval. It further notes that computer accessories and peripherals, including printers, scanners and servers, are integral to the computer system and qualify for higher depreciation.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was allowable for the housing project despite the objections regarding built-up area, non-filing of audit report, and non-production of completion certificate; (ii) Whether computer accessories and peripherals were eligible for higher depreciation as part of the computer system.

Issue (i): Whether deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was allowable for the housing project despite the objections regarding built-up area, non-filing of audit report, and non-production of completion certificate.

Analysis: The project had been approved before the later statutory change introducing a stricter completion-certificate requirement, and the earlier judicial decisions in the assessee's own case had already held that the built-up area condition was met on the facts. The earlier orders also applied the principle that a later amendment could not be used to impose a condition not in force when approval was granted. The Tribunal also followed the rule of consistency and the earlier view that non-issuance of the completion certificate by the authority could not be put against the assessee when the project was otherwise completed and the approval pre-dated the amendment.

Conclusion: Deduction under section 80IB(10) was correctly allowed and the revenue's objection failed.

Issue (ii): Whether computer accessories and peripherals were eligible for higher depreciation as part of the computer system.

Analysis: Computer accessories and peripherals such as printers, scanners and servers function as integral components of the computer system and cannot be effectively used independently of it. The jurisdictional High Court authority relied upon by the Tribunal treated such items as part of the computer system for depreciation purposes.

Conclusion: Higher depreciation was allowable on computer accessories and peripherals.

Final Conclusion: The revenue's appeals were rejected, and the assessee's cross objections were rendered infructuous.

Ratio Decidendi: A housing project approved before a later amendment cannot be denied deduction under section 80IB(10) by applying subsequently introduced conditions, and computer peripherals integral to the computer system are entitled to the higher computer depreciation rate.

---