https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403852 Deduction under section 80IB(10) was upheld where the assessee was the real developer of the housing project, despite the land not standing in its name and the sale deed being executed in favour of the co-operative society with the assessee as confirming party. The tribunal noted that the assessee had arranged the project, obtained plan approval, borne land and incidental costs, engaged contractors, and exercised dominant control over development and completion. Ownership of the land was not treated as a statutory precondition when the assessee assumed the commercial risks and rewards of development, consistent with jurisdictional precedent. The Revenue's challenge failed and the appellate relief was affirmed. en-us Thu, 07 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Feb 2021 09:31:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403852 Deduction under section 80IB(10) was upheld where the assessee was the real developer of the housing project, despite the land not standing in its name and the sale deed being executed in favour of the co-operative society with the assessee as confirming party. The tribunal noted that the assessee had arranged the project, obtained plan approval, borne land and incidental costs, engaged contractors, and exercised dominant control over development and completion. Ownership of the land was not treated as a statutory precondition when the assessee assumed the commercial risks and rewards of development, consistent with jurisdictional precedent. The Revenue's challenge failed and the appellate relief was affirmed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 07 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403852