TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 1244
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, The learned CIT(A) erred in law in allowing deduction of Rs. 48,18,878/- u/s.80IB(10) of the IT Act without appreciating that legal relationship between the assessee and the end user of units was that of "work contract". 2. The appellant craves to add to, amend or alter the above grounds as may be deemed necessary. Relief claimed in appeal The order of the CIT(A) on the above issue be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct at Mangalmurti Park, Ankleshwar on a land at Revenue Survey No.715. It is submitted by the ld.counsel for the assessee that the assessee's case is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Radhe Developers in Tax Appeal Nos.546 of 2008 and Others :: (2012) 204 taxman 543 :: 17 taxmann.com 156(Guj.). He submitted that the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in the case of M/s.Satsang Developers vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.1011, 2498 & 1221/Ahd/2012, dated 12/11/2013. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that in the aforesaid decision, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decided the case in favour of assessee and against the Revenue. Further, the ld.counsel fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ousing project and it has borne all risks and reward arising therefrom. Merely because the land was sold and the houses were constructed would not debar the assessee from claiming the deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act in view of the judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Radhe Developers(supra). We find that under the similar facts the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA Nos.1011, 2498 & 1221/Ahd/2012 (out of three appeals, two cross-appeals by the assessee) for AY 2008-09 in the case of M/s.Satsang Developers vs. ACIT in paras-7 & 7.1.vide order dated 12/11/2013 has held as under:- "7. We have considered the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arat High Court that the ld. Counsel for the assesse submitted that under the "Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act" as also the "General Development Act and Control Regulations" applicable to the City of Vadodara, there is no requirement that only the owner can develop a housing project on any land. This goes to show that this Act and Regulations on which our attention is drawn by ld.DR of the Revenue has been very much available before Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Radhe Developers (supra), and even after noting the same, it is observed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in that case that no provision of any other related statues was brought to their notice to demonstrate that ownership of the land would be a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dentical facts the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA Nos.1011,2498 and 1221/Ahd/2012(supra) in paras-9.2 and 9.3 has held as under:- "9.2. Now we take up the third and last objection of ld.CIT (A) that the assessee had sold the land separately and undertook the construction work as per a separate agreement and, therefore the assessee is not a builder or a developer but a land dealer and contractor. In this regard, in our considered opinion, the issue involved is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of ITAT Indore Bench rendered in the case of M/s.Vardhman Builders and Developers vs. ITO (supra). It is noted by the Tribunal in that case that the assessee had entered into an agreement for a sale of land and a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....goes to show that the facts in that case were identical. In that case, it was noted by the Tribunal that the assessee had chosen to register the plot in the name of the buyer on payment of specified amount in order to achieve cost saving and to ensure reliability and thereafter, the assessee had proceeded to construct the house as per building plan obtained in the name of the plot-owners on payment of subsequent installments. It is also noted that the assessee had also developed various public amenities within the project. Thereafter, it was held by the Tribunal that on a totality of a fact, the Tribunal is of the view that the assessee has undertaken developing and building housing projects as per the scheme provided in section 80-IB (10) ....