DCIT- 26 (1), MUMBAI vs. GUNDECHA BUILDERS, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2553/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 October 2022AY 2008-095 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) quashed the reopening of the assessment because the basis for it (the assessment order for AY 2006-07) had been decided in favor of the assessee by a coordinate bench. Therefore, the reopening could not survive.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80IB for a housing project. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment based on findings from a previous assessment year (2006-07) where a similar claim was disallowed. The reopening was challenged by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was valid when the foundational assessment order for a prior year was subsequently overturned. Whether the assessee fulfilled the conditions for Section 80IB deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IB,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, AR
For Respondent: Shri S. Anbuselvam, DR
Hearing: 12.07.2022Pronounced: 11.10.2022
1.

This appeal is filed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-26(1), Mumbai against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [the learned CIT (A)] for A.Y. 2008-09 passed on 15thSeptember 2021 raising solitary grounds of appeal against allowing the claim under Section 80IB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

2.

The brief fact of the case shows that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of builders and developers, it filed its return of income declaring total

5.

Assessee preferred the appeal before the learned CIT (A), challengingthe reopening of the assessment and also, on the merits of the case. The learned CIT (A) noted that this issue has already been decided by the co-ordinate Bench 23rdFebruary as per order dated 2017 in for A.Y. 2006-07. He therefore held that as the very foundation for initiation of action under Section 147 of the Act for A.Y. 2008-09 was passed on facts and findings for A.Y. 2006-07 which after the decision of the co-ordinate Bench ceased to exist and therefore, the reopening was quashed. Revenue is aggrieved with that order and has preferred the appeal before us. 06. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The ground of appeal raised by the learned Assessing Officer in the above appeal are as under: -

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, though the mandatory details required for deduction under Section 80IB was not provided in audit report in Form No.10CCB.”

7.

The learned Assessing Officer has not challenged the order of the learned CIT (A), wherein reopening of the assessment proceedings is quashed. The learned Assessing Officer has challenged the order only on the merits of disallowance of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. The learned CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merits of the case. He is merely quashed the reopening of the assessment because the original functional material for the reopening was the assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer for A.Y. 2006-07 that has already been decided for 2006-07 in favor of the assessee. Therefore, as the order of the learned Assessing Officer for A.Y. 2006-07 ceased to exist, naturally, reopening made on that basis cannot survive. Therefore, on this ground

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11.10.2022.

More judgments on Section 80IB

All 1,094 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →