TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 97
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Assessment Year 2005-2006 and Assessment Year 2006-2007. 2. Mr. Ahuja, learned counsel appearing in support of these Appeals would urge that reframed substantial question of law would arise for determination and consideration. That question reads as under: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, for computing deduction of profits of the assessee for A. Y. 2005-2006 onwards the provision of Section 80IB(10) subsection (14) in respect of the definition of "built up area" (including the measurements of projections and balconies) introduced with effect from 01.04.2005 would be applicable?" 3. Mr. Ahuja is very fair in urging that one of the questions raised for this Court's consideration and termed as substantial question....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....slature makes something clear which was always obvious and did not need always any elaboration or clarification. Such an amendment would, therefore, apply to all housing projects where the development is complete either before the cut off date or otherwise. 6. In relation to that, we find that Mr. Ahuja's submissions are not well founded. An identical case was dealt with by the Division Bench in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax15, Mumbai v/s M/s. Tinnwala Industries (supra), where the Division Bench expressly held that this definition which has been brought on the statute book with effect from 1st April 2005, would not apply to such projects which are completed prior to 1st April 2005. In that, the balcony area would not ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Assessee is on sale of the flats as that would be the only manner in which he would derive profit and later on book them. According to him, the date of sale would be the relevant date and not the date of completion of the project. Therefore, he cannot take assistance of the position prevailing prior to the amendment or the Division Bench order. Firstly, we do not find any such argument being raised on behalf of the Revenue either before the Commissioner or before the Tribunal. This is not a pure question of law and which we can decide with reference to some chart. This is a mixed issue and ought to have been squarely raised for consideration. The only argument raised was that, the definition of term 'built up area' is not pro....