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 denies deduction for housing project due to lack of completion certificate</h1> <h3>M/s. Surabhi Homes Pvt. Ltd., Versus ACIT, 3 (1), Bhopal</h3> M/s. Surabhi Homes Pvt. Ltd., Versus ACIT, 3 (1), Bhopal - TMI Issues Involved:1. Opportunity to defend.2. Disallowance of claim u/s 80IB.3. Consideration of evidence.4. Reliance on photograph.5. Completion of project within stipulated time.Summary:1. Opportunity to Defend:The assessee contended that a fair, proper, and meaningful opportunity was not afforded to put up a defense on the disputed issues. However, the judgment does not provide specific details on this issue, focusing instead on the substantive matters of the case.2. Disallowance of Claim u/s 80IB:The primary issue was the disallowance of the assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10). The Assessing Officer (AO) declined the claim on the grounds that the assessee had not obtained a completion certificate for the housing project. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, stating that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions laid down in clause (a)(i) read with Explanation (ii) of Section 80IB(10). The Tribunal confirmed that the completion certificate is a pre-condition for the deduction u/s 80IB(10).3. Consideration of Evidence:The assessee argued that the AO overlooked the papers and evidence furnished during the assessment. The Tribunal reviewed the records and found that the housing project was required to be completed by 31st March 2008, and a completion certificate was necessary. Since the assessee did not obtain this certificate, the claim for deduction was rightly disallowed.4. Reliance on Photograph:The CIT(A) upheld the AO's findings based on a photograph of house no. 84, which was deemed incomplete. The assessee contended that no deduction was claimed for house no. 84 as it was outside the scheme. The Tribunal did not find this argument sufficient to overturn the disallowance since the completion certificate for the entire project was not obtained.5. Completion of Project within Stipulated Time:The assessee claimed that the project was completed by 31st March 2008 and applied for the completion certificate on 15th January 2008, with reminders sent to the Municipal Corporation. The Tribunal noted that the completion certificate was not issued, and as per the provisions of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, the certificate is deemed issued if not granted within 15 days. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee did not meet the statutory requirement of obtaining the completion certificate, thus disallowing the deduction u/s 80IB(10).Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, confirming the disallowance of the deduction u/s 80IB(10) for the assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 due to the absence of a completion certificate, which is a mandatory requirement for the claim. The judgment emphasized the necessity of adhering to statutory requirements and the conditions laid down in the Income-tax Act.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found