TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 492
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....completed on 24.12.2007 and 19.12.2008 allowing with deduction u/s.80-IB amounting to Rs.66,15,960 and Rs.24,44,803 respectively. On the perusal of the assessment records for these years it was noticed by the CIT that deduction u/s.80-IB was wrongly allowed by the Assessing Officer without proper verification of the certificate issued by CIDCO. He found that one of the basic requirements for granting deduction u/s.80-IB was that the development and construction of housing property should commence on or after 1.10.1998. The assessee was show caused as to why deduction u/s.80-IB ought not to have been denied since the commencement certificate issued by the CIDCO indicated the date of commencement as 7.4.1998. He further took note of the fact ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7.4.1998. But for that there is no dispute on the fulfillment of the other conditions necessary for the granting of deduction u/s.80-IB for the years in question. It is well settled that the jurisdiction u/s.263 can be exercised only when the assessment is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Both these conditions are conjunctive and not disjunctive as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several cases including CAT v. Greenworld Corporation [2009] 314 ITR 81 (SC). From here it follows that in order to have jurisdiction u/s.263, the assessment order should not only be shown as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue but also erroneous. An assessment order is said to be prejudicial to the Revenu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d CIT(A) who vide his order dated 29.8.2003, copy placed at page 23 onwards of the paper book, accepted the assessee's claim and directed to grant deduction u/s. 80-IB(10) as claimed. On page 3 of that order passed by the learned CIT(A) it has been mentioned that : "As far as the condition of the commencement of the project after the first day of October, 1998 and the area of residential unit is concerned, same are undisputed". The learned A.R. stated that the Revenue accepted this order passed by the CIT(A) for assessment year 2001-2002 and no further appeal was preferred before the Tribunal. This submission has not been disputed by the learned Departmental Representative as well. From here it follows that the first year in which the date ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ess the N.A. Permission is obtained from the collector under the Provisions of M.L.R. Code 1966." 5. On going through this clause it is more than clear that the assessee was debarred from taking up any development work without obtaining permission from the Collector. In compliance with this certificate the assessee applied to the District Collector, Thane on 30.5.1998 and final no objection certificate was issued by the District Collector on 19.5.1999. Copy of such certificate of District Collector, Thane is available on pages 16 onwards of the paper book. When we read the commencement certificate issued by CIDCO dated 7.4.1998 in juxtaposition to the permission granted by the District Collector, Thane on 19.5.1999, it becomes apparent tha....