2020 (12) TMI 88

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. This Appeal was admitted on 05.07.2016 on the following substantial questions of law:- A. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the ld. ITAT erred in unjustly disallowing the Appellant herein to claim deductions under Section 80 IB (10) for the A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13? B. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the ld. ITAT has erred in failing to recognise that Sub- Clause(e)to Section 80IB(10) of the I.T. Act, 1961 came into effect only on 1st April, 2010 and not 19th August 2009 as presumed? 4. By Order dated 31.03.2014 the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed deductions to the assessee in respect of its housing project "Models Legacy" inter ali....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2014. 8. Mr. Pangam submits that in any case, the pro-rata deduction, as was granted by the Commissioner (Appeals) by his order dated 26.08.2015 could not have been disturbed by the ITAT. He submits that the High Courts of Madras, Delhi, and Karnataka have held that such pro-rata deduction is required to be granted in the following decisions: (i) Viswas Promoters Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant CIT, Circle I, Madras - (2013) 29 TaxMan.Com 19 (Madras); (ii) CIT Chennai v. Arun Excello Foundations Pvt.Ltd. - (2013) 29 TaxMan.Com 149 (Madras); (iii) CIT v. S.G. Estates Pvt. Ltd. - (2015) TMI 1302 (Delhi); and (iv) CIT & Anr. v. M/s. Brigade Enterprises Limited - ITA No.54 of 2012 decided on 22.09.2020 by the Karna....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ze of the plot which is required to have a minimum area of 1 Acre deserves no acceptance. Even if the area proportionate to the 5 residential units is excluded, the size of the plot which admeasures 28,014 sq. meters. i.e. almost about 7 Acres or thereabouts, will, in no manner, stand reduced to below 1 Acre. Therefore, this could not have been a ground to deny pro-rata deduction as was granted by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his Order dated 26.08.2015. 13. Since, Mr. Pangam, the learned counsel for the assessee on instructions has made a statement that the assessee would be satisfied with pro-rata deductions, we frame the following additional substantial question of law, which, according to us, arises in this appeal: "Whether,....