https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221225 Deduction under Section 80IB(10) was held to depend on whether the assessee was the real developer of an approved housing project, not on registered ownership of the land. Ownership is not a statutory precondition where the assessee undertakes the project at its own cost, risk and control, rather than acting as a works contractor for fixed remuneration. On the facts, the assessee had full development authority, bore the investment risk, and was entitled to the project surplus, so the housing project qualified for the deduction. The possession and development arrangements were also treated as sufficient, for income-tax purposes, to regard the assessee as owner under Section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act and Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Mar 2013 11:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221225 Deduction under Section 80IB(10) was held to depend on whether the assessee was the real developer of an approved housing project, not on registered ownership of the land. Ownership is not a statutory precondition where the assessee undertakes the project at its own cost, risk and control, rather than acting as a works contractor for fixed remuneration. On the facts, the assessee had full development authority, bore the investment risk, and was entitled to the project surplus, so the housing project qualified for the deduction. The possession and development arrangements were also treated as sufficient, for income-tax purposes, to regard the assessee as owner under Section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act and Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221225