2020 (9) TMI 676

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Year 2005-2006:- "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction under Section 80IB?" 2. Heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenue and Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/Revenue. 3. The issue involved in the present Appeal filed by the Revenue is squarely covered by the Judgment of a co-ordinate Bench of this court in the Assessee's own case for the preceding Assessment Year 2004-2005. 4. The question of law raised before us in the present Appeal filed by the Revenue is about the entitlement of the Assessee to get deduction under Section 80IB of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e. It cannot be said to be a private area and has to be treated as common area and has to be excluded from the calculation of built-up residential units particularly keeping in view the agreements and the Tamil Nadu Apartments' Ownership Act. Consequently, we dismiss this ground also." 6. The relevant portion from the Judgement of the co-ordinate Bench of this court in CIT v. Subba Reddy (HUF) (373 ITR 105) is also quoted below for ready reference:- "12. It is seen that car park has been separately shown in the agreement and according to the assessee, the same does not form part of the residential unit for the purpose of determining the maximum built-up area, in view of the definition for the term 'built-up area' came in....