Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2011 (3) TMI 1346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed ground No. 4 in his appeal that the CIT(A) failed to admit the additional ground on merit and failed to appreciate that gross income was brought to tax without netting off of the corresponding expenditure. This ground is not pressed before us and the same is dismissed as not pressed. 4. Brief facts of the issue in dispute are that the assessee is a real estate developer and there is only one issue in appeal that relates to the withdrawal of deduction under section 80-IB of the Income-tax Act. For assessment year 2007-08 the assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 1,75,08,544 under section 80-IB with respect to the following three housing projects :  (a)  Gardenia Project  (b)  Sunshine Project  (c)  Greenwood....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... enclosed with a wall all around with doors, windows and roof and used for habitation purpose. According to him portico and open terrace/balcony are not used for habitation purpose and it cannot be part of built-up area. Balcony or projection is not covered by slab. It is just the roof of the floor below. The portico or parking area is not habitable and used for parking purposes and it cannot be part of built-up area. He drew our attention to the meaning of built-up area as mentioned in municipal bye-laws, national building code and Indian Standard Code (page 72). The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that computation of built-up area is in accordance with the above norms. He filed a photocopy of building plan and photos of each fl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....are of land but such share of land is not taken into consideration while computing the built-up area of the flat. Similarly, the land on which the bungalow is constructed cannot be taken as part of built-up area. The buildings are constructed on a land and for this purpose land always remains as appurtenant but cannot be considered as built-up area. Built-up area is nothing but constructed area. The entire area appurtenant to the building with a compound wall cannot, therefore, constitute as built-up area. Further he submitted that in a multi-storeyed building the terrace is in top floor which is open to sky and is not habitable. The terrace area cannot form part of the residential unit. Similarly, open terrace provided for a bungalow canno....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... This amendment starts with "inner measurement of residential unit". Even as per common parlance built-up area is the carpet area covered by thickness of wall + balcony + portico (projection). Thus, whether it is the inner measurement or outer measurement one thing is amply clear that, it should be actual measurement not any estimate. The dispute herein is with regard inclusion of portico and balcony for measuring the built-up area of each residential unit. If the portico and balcony area is added, the built-up area would exceed 1500 sq. ft. per unit. As per the definition as stated in section 80-IB(14)(a) built-up area includes projection and balcony. Accepted rules of interpretation for and inclusive definition as elucidated by the Hon'b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....estriction on it too has to be construed so as to advance the objective of the provision and not to frustrate it. In our opinion this case law has no application to the facts of the assessee's case. The argument of the learned counsel for the assessee is good in part but the inference does not logically follow. In our opinion, the legislative expedience adopted to achieve that objective in the provision requires to be given effect on it is own language. There is no ambiguity in clause (a) of sub-section (14) of section 80-IB of the Act. As there is no ambiguity in the statutory language, resort to interpretation process to unfold the legislative intent becomes impermissible. The supposed intention of the legislature cannot then be appealed ....