2016 (11) TMI 1146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sment passed U/S 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the I.T. Act is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the law, equity and natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT(A). has erred in law and on facts in Upholding the order of the Ld. A.O. of disallowance of claim made u/s 80IB of IT. Act, 1961 for Rs. 36,08,678/-. 3. That the construction of the Residential Units in the housing project fulfills the condition laid down in section 80IB(10) of the Act & rejection of claim on the grounds that appellant was not the owner of the land, approval for carrying out the development was not in the name of the appellant, treating the appellant firm as mere "Works Contractors" ate not tenable in law and in fact. Whereas the function, rights. Responsibilities etc. as agreed wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2007 setting aside the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 27.1.2006 with the direction to examine the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act was finalized on 18.5.2007 after disallowing the deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act at Rs. 36,08,678/-. On appeal ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act following the decision for Asst. Year 2004-05 in assessee's own case. Aggrieved, Revenue came up before the Tribunal and vide its order dated 18.03.2009 in ITA No.1441/Ahd/2008 the Co-ordinate Bench set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restored the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to decide the issue in the light of the decision of the Tribun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wherein disallowance of claim u/s 80IB(10) of the Act for Rs. 36,08,678/- has been made. We observe that ld. AR has referred and relied on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case for Asst. Year 2004-05 wherein reference has been given to the order of Coordinate Bench in the case of Radhe Developers. We also observe that in the first round when the matter came up before the Coordinate Bench complete issue was set aside to the file of Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the issue in the light of the decision of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Shakti Corporation and also in the case of Radhe Developers (supra). We find that in ITA No.2145/Ahd/2007 for Asst. Year 2004-05 in assessee's own case similar issue....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ownership that anyone in possession of property in his own title exercising such dominion over the property as would enable others being excluded there from and having the right to use and occupy the property and/or to enjoy right would be owner of the building though a formal deed of title might not have been executed and registered as contemplated by the Transfer of Property Act, the Registration Act etc. In the present case before us, by virtue of 'Agreement to Sale' and 'Development Agreement', the assessee has acquired dominion over the land to the exclusion of others and he has completed the project in terms and conditions laid down u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act, to claim deduction on the profit derived from construction a....