THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S VARUN DEVELOPERS

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.199 OF 2014 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CENTRAL CIRCLE

C.R. BUILDING

QUEENS ROAD

BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1)

C.R BUILDING

QUEENS ROAD

BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V. ARAVIND ADV.,) AND: M/S VARUN DEVELOPERS # 41, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A SHANKAR SENIOR FOR SRI. V. CHANDRASEKHAR AND M. LAVA ADVS.,) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 05.12.2013 PASSED

2 IN ITA NO.264/BANG/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008, PRAYING TO: (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO. NO.264/BANG/2013 DATED:05.12.2013 AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2007-08. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 20.07.2015 on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act on proportionate basis in respect of the flats measuring less than 1500 square feet, without taking into consideration that the benefit under

3 section 80IB(10) is in respect of the entire "housing project" and not in respect of the flats/units specific independently? 2. Without prejudice to first question of law, Whether on the facts and in the circumstances, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee would be entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act in respect of 12th and 13th floor flats, when the flats were combined and were measuring more than 1500 square feet? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction of the flats at the 12th and 13th floor when the assessee has not claimed benefit in the return of income filed, without revising the original return of income? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of the assessee from project "Mantri Sarovar" has to be computed for the Assessment year 2006-07 on

4 the basis of "Project computation method" without appreciating that as per AS7 and AS9, the assessee has to follow percentage completion method as the assessee is a builder and developer? 2. For the reasons assigned by us in the judgment passed today in I.T.A.No.198/2014, the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE ss