Tribunal grants deduction for housing project split, overturns disallowance for late TDS. Recomputation of interest required. Penalty proceedings premature.

The Tribunal allowed the Assessee's appeal, granting the deduction under Section 80IB(10) for a housing project, finding it met the conditions despite being split into multiple projects. The disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for late TDS deduction was overturned for payments made before the return filing. Interest under Section 234B was to be recomputed, and penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were deemed premature and not addressed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for late deduction and non-deduction of TDS.
3. Charging of interest under Section 234B.
4. Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c).

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deduction under Section 80IB(10):
The Assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the construction of housing projects, claimed a deduction of Rs. 62,83,272 under Section 80IB(10) for the A.Y. 2006-07. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) disallowed this deduction, arguing that the housing project was split into three different projects, each on a plot of land less than 1 acre, which did not meet the conditions of Section 80IB(10). The CIT(A) upheld the A.O.'s decision, noting that the Assessee had entered into three separate development agreements for plots below 1 acre and that the built-up area of some flats exceeded 1500 sq. ft.

However, the Tribunal found that the Assessee's project "Pushkar Residency" was approved by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) as a single project with a total plot area of 4717 sq. mtrs. (1.166 acres). The Tribunal referred to the Bombay High Court's decision in CIT vs. Vandana Properties and the Madras High Court's decision in CIT vs. Voora Property Developers P. Ltd., which held that multiple housing projects on a plot of land exceeding 1 acre could qualify for deduction under Section 80IB(10). The Tribunal concluded that the Assessee's project met the conditions of Section 80IB(10) and allowed the deduction.

2. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia):
The A.O. disallowed payments totaling Rs. 44,48,483 under Section 40(a)(ia) due to late deduction and non-deduction of TDS. This included Rs. 39,00,000 paid to Shreenath Builders, where TDS was deducted on 31st March 2006 but deposited on 31st May 2006, and Rs. 5,48,483 paid to various contractors without TDS deduction.

The Tribunal noted that the Assessee had deposited the TDS before filing the return of income, in line with the Gujarat High Court's decision in CIT vs. Omprakash Chaudhary, which held that the amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act 2010 was retrospective. Thus, the disallowance of Rs. 39,00,000 was not warranted.

For the payment to Anar Builders Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal found no evidence that the payee had included the payment in its income and paid tax. This issue was remanded to the A.O. for re-examination. Similarly, the payments to Dayal Krupa and Viral Transport were remanded for verification, as the Assessee claimed these were not contractual payments requiring TDS.

3. Charging of Interest under Section 234B:
The Tribunal held that the issue of charging interest under Section 234B was consequential and directed the A.O. to recompute the interest based on the final determined income.

4. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(1)(c):
The Tribunal found the ground related to the initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) to be premature and did not adjudicate on it.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the Assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, granting the deduction under Section 80IB(10) and remanding the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for further verification. The issue of interest under Section 234B was directed to be recomputed, and the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were not addressed as they were premature.

---