2019 (9) TMI 1762

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Real Estate Development. Assessee filed its original return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 15.10.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming deduction of Rs. 24,16,16,000/- u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessee revised return of income on 29.03.2012 after modifying the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act at Rs. 49,47,079/-. The return was initially processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case was reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Subsequently, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act vide order dt. 21.03.2014 and the total income was determined at Rs. 1,64,47,607/- inter-alia by denying the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the two members of JV for their respective contribution and expenses incurred." 3. All the grounds being inter-connected are considered together. 4. AO noticed that assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act on the income from Bramha-Skyline Joint Venture (JV). AO noted that assessee is a member of Bramha-Skyline which is a JV between Bramha Builders and Skyline Developers. He noted that the project was first commenced from 03.03.2007 and completed on 04.11.2009. He also noted that M/s. Skyline Developers had introduced land admeasuring 38200 sq.mtrs and M/.s Brahma Builders had agreed to construct on the land. Accordingly Brahma Skyline JV was formed for developing the Skyline Housing Project. AO noted that the members of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the society in terms of the development agreement and, thereafter, after getting the rights to develop the balance portion of the land entered into a JV with M/s. Bramha Builders. The fact 'thus brought on record clearly indicates the Appellant to have acted as a developer and builder and not merely introduced the land. It is relevant to point out that the development of the project was carried out by the Appellant firm firstly on its own with respect to the portion of the property to be constructed and handed over to the society and; secondly in JV with M/s. Bramha Builders with respect to the portion of the property which was to be sold to outsiders and the Appellant in the JV worked with equal risk. Further, the Appellant also satis....