2012 (11) TMI 1304

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 31st March 2008 in ITA. No. 406/Mds/2007 and order dated 28.04.2009 in ITA.No. 1003/Mds/2008 relating to the assessment year 2003-04 raising the following questions of law:- "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Commissioner was not justified in revising the assessment order under Section 263 ? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing the benefit of claim under Section 80IB(10) when the assessee is not a developer, but only a builder, when the eligibility to deduction u/s.80IB(10) is conferred for developing and building housing projects ? " 2. It is seen from the facts narrated therein that the assessee is engaged in the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roperty. Thus, the assessee was not the owner of the property and the intention of the owners of the land was to develop the land and construct the building, and that the assessee was only acting as a builder, who assisted the land owner in the construction. In the circumstances, the assessee's claim was negatived and directions were issued to the Assessing Officer to revise the order of assessment accordingly. 5. Aggrieved by this, the assessee went on appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, who held that when the Assessing Officer has taken one view based on the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the possibility of yet another view would not empower the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) un....