<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (1) TMI 1867 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466879</link>
    <description>Entitlement to deduction under section 80IB(10) depended on whether the assessee acted as a developer or merely as a contractor, with the evidentiary record on land ownership, project approvals and completion certificate requiring closer scrutiny. The tribunal noted that the assessee had produced material supporting its claim that it purchased the land, obtained approvals and completion certificate in its own name, and developed the housing project, while the lower authorities had rejected the claim mainly because plots were sold before construction. As similar assessments for earlier years were pending, the matter was sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication on all relevant evidence, without any final finding on the deduction claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:51:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1867 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466879</link>
      <description>Entitlement to deduction under section 80IB(10) depended on whether the assessee acted as a developer or merely as a contractor, with the evidentiary record on land ownership, project approvals and completion certificate requiring closer scrutiny. The tribunal noted that the assessee had produced material supporting its claim that it purchased the land, obtained approvals and completion certificate in its own name, and developed the housing project, while the lower authorities had rejected the claim mainly because plots were sold before construction. As similar assessments for earlier years were pending, the matter was sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication on all relevant evidence, without any final finding on the deduction claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>