Tribunal allows Section 80IB(10) deduction claim, dismisses Revenue's appeals.

The tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal by accepting the Section 80IB(10) deduction claim. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed, and the assessee's cross objections were also dismissed as not pressed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of Bombay Stock Exchange payment as penalty.
2. Treatment of assets written off as capital loss.
3. Rejection of Section 80IB(10) deduction claim.
4. Completion of residential projects before the stipulated dates for Section 80IB(10) deduction.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Bombay Stock Exchange Payment as Penalty:
The assessee challenged the CIT(A)’s order affirming the Assessing Officer’s disallowance of Rs. 60,000/- paid to the Bombay Stock Exchange as a penalty. The CIT(A) held that if the assessee succeeded on the Section 80IB(10) deduction issue, the disallowance would only increase business income otherwise eligible for deduction. However, the tribunal found no merit in this contention and upheld the disallowance.

2. Treatment of Assets Written Off as Capital Loss:
The assessee contested the CIT(A)’s confirmation of the Assessing Officer’s treatment of assets written off amounting to Rs. 59,35,105/- as capital loss. The CIT(A) recorded the assessee’s concession, treating it as an instance of capital loss not eligible for the deduction. The tribunal upheld this treatment, finding no merit in the assessee’s contention.

3. Rejection of Section 80IB(10) Deduction Claim:
The primary issue for adjudication was the assessee’s claim of Section 80IB(10) deduction amounting to Rs. 2.79 crores for the assessment year 2005-06. The Assessing Officer had disallowed this deduction, arguing that the assessee was neither the owner of the land nor developed the projects itself. The CIT(A) affirmed this disallowance, citing that the assessee was merely a contractor and not a developer, and that the projects were not completed before the statutory deadline.

The tribunal noted that the assessee's projects were approved before the amendments to Section 80IB(10) effective from 01.04.2005. The tribunal referred to multiple judgments, including those from the jurisdictional high court and the Supreme Court, which held that the amended provisions were prospective and not applicable to projects approved before 01.04.2005. The tribunal reversed the CIT(A)’s findings on the first five reasons, following the jurisdictional high court’s judgment.

4. Completion of Residential Projects:
The tribunal addressed the issue of whether the assessee completed the projects before the stipulated dates. The assessee argued that the projects were completed before the deadlines, supported by the auditor’s certificates and other documents. The delay in obtaining completion certificates from the local authority was due to technical reasons beyond the assessee’s control.

The tribunal referred to the jurisdictional high court’s decision in Tarnetar Corporation, which held that substantial compliance with the completion requirement was sufficient, and delays due to technical reasons should not disqualify the deduction. The tribunal found that the assessee had substantially complied with the completion requirement and allowed the deduction.

Conclusion:
- The assessee’s appeal ITA No.1787/Ahd/2011 was partly allowed, accepting the Section 80IB(10) deduction claim.
- The Revenue’s appeals IT(SS)A Nos. 122 to 124 & 127/Ahd/2013 were dismissed.
- The assessee’s cross objections CO Nos. 118 to 120 & 123/Ahd/2013 were dismissed as not pressed.

[Pronounced in the open Court on this the 31st day of March, 2017]

---