AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1197
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... housing project at Pune. Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 21.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs. 37,14,667/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.27.03.2015 and the total income was determined at Rs. 4,92,99,970/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.24.10.2016 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)-5/Dy.CIT, Cir-12, Pune/130/2015-16) granted substantial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds : "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in allowing the pro-r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as a whole is necessary. In the case of the assessee AO noted that Building "A" could not be completed even by 31.03.2012 which was the prescribed date for completion of the project as a whole and therefore assessee had violated the mandatory conditions for being eligible to claim deduction. He was further of the view that deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act is allowable for the profits of the project as a whole and not for the part of the project on a pro-rata basis. He therefore held that assessee was not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act for the housing project "Faith" and accordingly rejected the claim of 4,55,85,304/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who granted partial relief to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., regarding the misconstrued interpretation by the AO, in the case of Brahma Associates & Others (supra) is further fortified by the above judicial pronouncements referred to by the Appellant and thus, denying the Appellant proportionate deduction u/s 80IB (10) is not justified. These judicial decisions have given categorical findings, that, for a housing project, if all the conditions as laid down in Section 80IB (10) of the Act are fulfilled, the assesses are entitled to proportionate deduction and/ or deduction on pro-rata basis for the part completed by it within the prescribed time limit. In the case of the Appellant, it has been seen, that the Appellant's project 'Faith' commenced on 29.03.2007 and the first and second com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith the provisions laid down in Sec 80IB(10) of the Act in respect of 3 buildings for 108 residential flats constructed, and the project was entirely a residential project, relying on the ratio of the decisions of the Plethora of Judicial pronouncements cited by the Appellant. I do not find any reason, not to allow the Appellants claim of proportionate deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The Appellant is therefore, entitled to proportionate deduction u/s 80IB(10) for the 'B', 'C', 'D' Buildings constructed and completed. The AO is directed to allow deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act on the profit earned by the Appellant from the said Buildings. The additional ground raised by the Appellant is accordingly allowed." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....favour of assessee and against the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue had carried the matter before Tribunal. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of Revenue by observing as under : "6. We heard both the sides on the limited issue of allowing deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act and perused the orders of AO and the CIT(A) and the decisions relied upon by the assessee. On going through the finding of CIT(A) on this issue, we find the CIT(A) has rightly allowed the deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act to the assessee after considering the following important aspects : 1. It is undisputed fact that the assessee completed construction of 108 flats and obtained comple....