Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-4, Pune on 17-09-2018 in relation to the assessment year 2010-11.
The first ground about passing of assessment order in the hands of a wrong person was not pressed by the ld. AR. The same is, therefore, dismissed.
The second ground is against the denial of deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’).
2 ITA No.1964/PUN/2018 Sangeeta Hanumant Nazirkar
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee
claimed deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act. The AO observed
that one of the conditions required for making such a claim,
namely, that the project should be on the size of the plot of
land which has minimum area of one acre, was not fulfilled.
He observed that the project was completed on a plot of
3742.20 sq. mtrs., which was less than one acre. He,
therefore, denied the deduction. The ld. CIT(A) did not allow
any relief on this score, against which the assessee has come
up in appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant
material on record. The ld. AR contended that the authorities
below erred in considering the area of plot at less than one
acre. In support of his submission, he relied on Sanctioned
plan and Commencement letter, copies of which have been
placed at page 21 etc. of the paper book. The ld. AR
contended that as per this Plan, the total area is more than the
stipulated one, which aspect has not been properly considered.
In view of the fact that there is some difference in the area set
out in the assessment order and given in the Sanctioned plan, I
am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would
3 ITA No.1964/PUN/2018 Sangeeta Hanumant Nazirkar
meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the
matter is restored to the file of AO. I order accordingly and
direct him to decide the issue afresh in the light of the
Sanctioned plan and other relevant documents. Needless to
say, the assessee will be allowed a reasonable opportunity of
hearing by the AO in the fresh proceedings.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical
purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 21st February, 2019. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य� उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT उपा�य� उपा�य�
पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 21st February, 2019 सतीश आदेश क� क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / 3. The CIT (Appeals)-3, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT-2, Pune िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. // True copy // 6.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार
// True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
ITA No.1964/PUN/2018 Sangeeta Hanumant Nazirkar
Date 1. Draft dictated on 20-02-2019 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 20-02-2019 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed JM before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved JM by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *