2019 (1) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in treating the income received on letting out as house property income? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that receipts from the sale of stilt parking as part of the residential unit and therefore also eligible for a deduction under Section 80IB(10)? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in allowing the appeal of the assessee and deleting the disallowance under Section 80IB on common expenses relatable to Poiser Project and Saki Naka Project, which were debited to Sakinaka Project with clear cut intention to suppr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ove decision the issue now stands concluded in favour of the revenue by the decision of the Supreme Court in Chennai Properties and Investments Limited, Chennai v/s. CIT (2015)14 SCC 793 and Rayala Corporation Private Limited v/s. ACIT (2016)15 SCC 201. In view of the above, it is submitted that the appeal should be admitted. (e) In the present facts it is undisputed that the respondentassessee is in the business of development of real estate projects and letting of property is not the business of the respondentassessee. In both the decisions relied upon by Mr. Pinto i.e. Chennai Properties (supra) and Rayala Corporation (supra), the Supreme Court on facts found that the appellant was in the business of letting out its property on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT v/s. M/s. Gundecha Builders (supra) were admitted on 7th March, 2013. (b) However, Ms. Khan, the learned counsel appearing for the respondentassessee invites our attention to the order of this Court dated 25th July, 2011 in CIT v/s. Purvankara Projects Limited (ITXA no.4975 of 2010) which dismissed an identical question as raised herein, as not giving rise to any substantial question of law. Ms. Khan further points out that in the present proceeding also the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal have rendered a finding of fact that the car parking space stilt forms part and parcel of the housing project after obtaining the approval from the competent authority. Prima facie, it appears that the issue stands concluded in favour of the re....