TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (3) TMI 687
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urnished before him during the course of the assessment and as such entire order has become arbitrary and baseless. 4. That ld. CIT's upholdings the ld. Assessing Officer's findings on the basis of impugned photograph of a house forming part of the assessment order are erroneous, materially incorrect, bad on facts, baseless and therefore unsustainable in law. 5. That in the face of prevailing legal standards the ld. Assessing Officer has erred in holding that the assessee has failed in completing the project within the stipulated time period. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and records perused. Facts of the case in the assessment year 2006-07 are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of building. During the relevant assessment year under consideration, the assessee has undertaken development and building of housing project for which deduction was claimed u/s 80IB(10). The Assessing Officer declined claim of deduction on the plea that the assessee has not obtained completion certificate. He also observed that house no.84 was not complete, therefore, the project as a whole was not completed before the specified date. 4. By....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r is empowered to give permission to construct or reconstruct; shall within one month of the completion of the work delivered to the Commissioner at his office a notice in writing of such completion and shall given to the Commissioner all necessary facilities for the inspection of such work. (2) Within seven days after the receipt of the said notice the Commissioner shall depute an officer to commence the inspection of such work. (3) Within seven days from the date of commencement of such inspection the Commissioner shall- (a) give permission for the occupation of the building erected or for the use of the part of the building re-erected; or (b) refuse such permission in case such erection, construction or reconstruction is in contravention of any provision of this Act or any rule or byelaw made there under or any other enactment for the time being in force. (4) No person shall occupy or permit to be occupied any such building or use or permit to be used any part affected by the re-erection of such building -  ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tive device adopted for the sake of convenience in order to avoid verbatim reproduction of the provisions of the earlier Act into the later. When an earlier Act or certain of its provisions are incorporated by reference into a later Act, the provisions so incorporated become part and parcel of the later Act as if they had been 'bodily transposed into it.' The effect of Incorporation is admirably stated by Lord Esher, M.R. : 'If a subsequent Act brings into itself by reference some of the clauses of a former Act, the legal effect of that, as has often been held, is to write those sections into the new Act as if they had been actually written in it with the pen, or printed in it." In view of the provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961 read with section 301 of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, as the certified has not been issued, it has to be deemed that the date of completion is the same as the date claimed by the assessee. " 39. The ld. Authorized Representative further argued that explanation (ii) to Section 80 IB(10)(a) reads as under :- (ii) the date of completion of construction of the housing project sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that neither injustice nor absurdity was intended. If a literal interpretation would produce such a result and the language admits of an interpretation which would avoid it, then the latter interpretation may be adopted. No statute should be interpreted in such a manner as to render any provision completely meaningless or redundant. In Varghese (KP) vs. ITO, the Supreme Court observed - "It is a well settled rule of construction that where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly absurd an-d unjust result which could never have been intended by the legislature, the court may modify the language used by the legislature or even do some violence to it, so as to achieve the obvious intention of the legislature and produce a rational construction. The court may also in such a case read into the statutory provisions a condition which, though not expressed. While the consequences of a suggested construction cannot alter the meaning of a provision, they can be taken into account to help in fixing its meaning." Absurdity has to be avoided in interpretation of a statutory provision. Similar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oration to issue certificate of completion. It was not issued. Hence it may please be deemed to have been issued that the MPMC Act 1956 permitted the assessee to occupy the houses as safe havens. " 7. With regard to the observation of Assessing Officer in respect of house no. 84, contention of the ld. Authorized Representative was that the assessee has not sought for any deduction in respect of House No.4, since it was out of the scheme which has been undertaken by the assessee. Since no deduction was claimed u/s 80IB(10) in respect of the profit attributable to house no.84, as per ld. Authorized Representative , the Assessing Officer was not justified in declining claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) on the remaining houses, which were constructed and duly completed before the statutory period prescribed under the law. 8. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR relied on the finding recorded by the lower authorities to the effect that housing project was not complete, therefore, Municipal Corporation did not issue the completion certificate, which is a pre-condition for allowing claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10). 9. We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1.4.2004 read as under :- "Sub-Section (10) was substituted by the Finance (No.2) Act of 2004 w.e.f. 1.4.2005 and prior to its substitution, sub-section (10) as amended by the Finance Act 2000 w.e.f. 1.4.2001 and Finance Act 2003 with retrospective effect from 1.4.2002 read as under: "(10) The amount of profit in case of an undertaking developing and building housing project approved before 31st day of March, 2005 by a local authority, shall be 100% of the profit derived in any previous year relevant to any assessment year from such housing project if (a) such undertaking has commenced or commences development and construction of the housing project on or after the first day of October, 1998, (b) the project is on the size of a plot of land which has a minimum area of one acre and (c) the residential unit has a maximum builtup area of 1000 sq.ft. where such residential unit is situated within the cities of Delhi or Mumbai or within 25 k.m. from the municipal limit of these cities and 1500 sq.ft. at any other pl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ipal limits of these cities and one thousand and five hundred square feet at any other place; (d) the built-up area of the shops and other commercial establishments included in the housing project does not exceed five per cent of the aggregate built-up area of the housing project or two thousand square feet, whichever is less" It is very clear from the above provisions that as on 1.4.2004 there was no condition for obtaining completion certificate of the housing project for claiming deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. First condition was that the assessee has commenced development and construction of housing project on or after first day of October, 1998. Second condition was that project is on the size of plot of land which has a minimum area of one acre. The third condition was that residential unit has a maximum built up area of 1000 sq.ft. where such residential unit is situated within the city of Delhi or Mumbai or within 25 kms from the municipal limits of these cities and 1500 sq.ft. in any other place. We found that all these three conditions have been complied with by the Assessing Officer. 9. Now the question arises whether the Assessing Officer has rightly ....