TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1366
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isions of clause (e) & (f) of section 80IB(10) are not applicable to the flats booked prior to 01.04.2010, even if the sale of the said flats was made after 01.04.2010 (date of insertion of clause e & f)? 3. The appellant craves the right to amend alter or add to any of the grounds of appeal given above." 3. The brief facts of the case are that during the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer observed that as per l0CCB report the housing project was completed on 30.06.2010 but in the profit & loss account work-in-progress was appearing and thus wrong information was submitted by the assessee with regard to completion of project. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 80IB(10) and thus is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of Rs.1,54,98,395/- made u/s 80IB of the I.T. Act. On the issue of disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB of I.T. Act, the CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that the issue is covered by the decision of appellate authority in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13 wherein it was held that provisions of cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 1,33,746/- Assessed income Rs. 18,60,54,169/- Assessed income (Rounded off) Rs. 18,60,54,170/- Assessed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, as above. Issue copy of order, demand notice of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee. Credit of TDS and prepaid taxes will be allowed after verification. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately. 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who has granted the necessary relief to the assessee. Now, the Revenue is in appeal against the said findings of the ld CIT(A). 7. Now, the Revenue is in appeal against the said findings of the ld CIT(A) which is contained at para 18 & 19 of his order which is reproduced as under:- "18. In view of the above judicial pronouncements, I agree that the addition of Rs. 14,47,70,242/- on account of sales appearing in ITS Data, addition u/s 43CA of Rs. 2,09,37,049/-and disallowance of Rs. 1,33,746/- u/s 14A are eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10). It is pertinent to mention that although this ground of appeal is allowed for academic purposes only since the addition of Rs.14,47,70,242/- on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le units to the same individual in alleged violation of the condition contained in section 80IB(10)(e)&(f) introduced by Finance Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2010. However this disallowance in both the years, was also deleted by the ld. CIT(A). c) The summarized history in terms of deduction eligibility u/s 80IB(10) is attached as Annexure. Department Appeal :- Ground No. 1 & Ground No. 2 Assessing Officer Ld. AO disallowed the claim u/s 80IB for the following two reasons: a) The Project claimed to have been completed has not yet been completed, as the construction expenses continue to appear in the audited financial statements [AO page 2 para (ii)(a)]. b) The assessee company violated the provisions of section 80IB (10) (e) & (f) [AO page 3 para (ii)(b)]. CIT(A): Ld. CIT(A), after analyzing the submission of the assessee company and evaluating the remand report of the Id. AO thereon and also observing that the issues were squarely covered by the order of CIT(A) in earlier years, allowed the appeal. Submission 1. A.Y. 2011-12 1.1 The dispute of effective date of applicability of clauses (e)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....axmann.com 468 (Mumbai) 16 2. ITO Jaswant A v ITO and Patel Punam Chand N vs ITO (2015) 58 taxmann.com 135 (Ahmedabad- Trib.)/(2015)38 ITR 135 17 3. DCIT v Mandavi Builders ITA No. 1734-1735/Bang/2013 17 2. Further reliance is placed on the following judicial precedents: High Court: Sr. No. Case law Name of High Court 1. CIT v Elegant Estates (2018) 407 ITR 425 AY 2011-12-80IB(10)(f) prospective (CLC REF. 18-21) Madras 2. Pr. CIT v Sahara States Gorakhpur (2019) 418 ITR 168-80IB(10)(d) prospective (CLC REF. 22-28) Allahabad ITAT Sr. No. Case law Name of High Court 1. DCIT v RDB Realty & Infrastructure Ltd. ITA No. 575/Kol/2016 (CLC REF. 29-32) AY 2011-12 order dated 20.07.2018-80IB(10)(f) prospective Kolkata 3. During the year under appeal, the total sales consisted only of the flats of Phase 1.In all 12 flats were sold aggregating to Rs. 2,96,71,000. None of the flats sold were violative of the provisions of 80IB (10) (e) & (f). 4. Another issue raised by Id. AO was regarding Phase I not yet being complete. It is submitted that whatever construction expenses are appearing in the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deduction u/s 80IB and the claim of Rs. 1,54,98,395/- made u/s 80IB of the Act is fit for disallowance and the ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has admitted in the written submission in letter dated 27.03.2014 that the assessee's broker had sold 20 flats to the persons who were one single entity was allotted more than one flat and ld. Sr. DR pointed out that the assessee have allotted 20 residential unit in Sep, 2007 when the provision did not exceed the amendment made in the provisions of section 80IB(10) of the Act was the inclusion of sub clause (e) & (f). It is to be noted where sub clause (e) & (f) has made amendments 80IB(10) of the Act which mentioned that not more than one residential unit in the housing project could be allotted to an individual and if one residential unit is allotted to an individual, no more residential unit could be allotted to its spouse, minor children and HUF. The ld. Sr. DR fully relied and uphold the orders passed during the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer. He is legally and effectively and correct and the disallowance is made according to the amendments and the ld. DR submitted that the decision of ld. CIT(A) is not acceptabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sted 450 units and 6 shops. This phase-1 was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act where the project is completed as on 30.06.20210 and the 2nd phase of the project is not eligible for deduction where the phase is under construction during the relevant period of A.Y 2013-14. Further, we observe that the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance taking into consideration the proceeding to assessment year that the claim of the assessee company u/s 80IB(10) was duly examined at the assessment stage and deduction was accordingly allowed except in respect of small proportionate amount for sale of multiple units to the same individual in alleged violation of the condition contained in section 80IB (10) (e)& (f) introduced by the Finance Act 2009 w.e.f 01.04.2010. Observing the facts and circumstances of the case that the legal issue of clause (e) & (f) is prospective in nature. Taking into consideration, the A.Y 2011-12, applicability of section 80IB(10) and clause (e) & (f) held that the amendment introduced clauses (e) & (f) and u/s 80IB(10) were prospective in nature. 12. The ld. CIT(A) has placed judicial precedence concerning to different two places introduced from time to....