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 / TMI Blogs / RSS

2012 (8) TMI 509

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....   2. Short facts apropos are that assessee, engaged in property development business, had filed its return for the impugned assessment year claiming deduction of Rs. 6,72,70,165/- under Section 80-IB of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noted by the Assessing Officer that assessee was selling undivided share of land to the respective buyers and thereafter, entering into contracts with prospective buyers for constructing flats. As per the A.O., owners of the undivided share of land had entered into contracts for construction of flats with the assessee and payments received by the assessee from such owners were as per the terms of such agreements with them. According to him, Explanation to Section 80-IB....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at was done as per the requirement of the owner and assessee was only a contractor who had agreed to construct flats for the proposed owners of the undivided share of land. In this view of the matter, A.O. denied deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Act. 3. In its appeal before CIT(Appeals), argument of the assessee was that it had satisfied all the conditions mentioned in Section 80-IB(10) of the Act and the claim was unjustifiably denied. Reliance was placed on the decision of a co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT v. Smt. C. Rajini [9 ITR (Trib.) 487]. CIT(Appeals) was appreciative of this contention of the assessee. According to him, assessee had satisfied all the conditions required for deduction under Section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unal in the case of Smt. C. Rajini (supra). 6. We have perused the orders and heard the rival submissions. The investment made by the assessee for the project and the source for such investment were as under:- Particulars Amount (Rs.) Investment in Land during FY 2005-05 1,15,58,524 Investment in Development of Project from FY 2004-05 to 2006-07 5,63,02,852 Total Sources 6,78,61,376 Share Capital & share deposit money 9,07,000 Unsecured Loan from Promoters & Relatives 89,07,342 Demand Loan & Over Draft from City Union Bank 5,51,70,156 Advance from Customers 28,76,878 Total 6,78,61,376 None of these figures have been disputed or rebutted by the Revenue. It is also not disputed th....