Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ D BENCH : CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY]
आदेश / O R D E R
PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-VI, Chennai, dated 23.6.2014 and pertains to assessment year 2007-08.
Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee claimed deduction u/s ITA No. 2531/14 :- 2 -:
80IB(10) of the Act. Initially, the Assessing Officer allowed the claim of the assessee u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Subsequently, due to amendment of sec. 80IB(10) with effect from 1.4.2005, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 21.3.2012. The CIT(A) by following the order of this Tribunal for assessment year 2006-07 found that the amendment brought in sec.
80IB is not applicable in respect of the project approved before 1.4.2005. In this case, the project was approved by the local authorities on 19.12.2003, therefore, the CIT(A) found that the claim of the assessee cannot be disallowed since the project was approved before 1.4.2005. The ld. DR further pointed out that the CIT(A) has also found that reopening of assessment is also bad in law. On a query from the Bench, the ld. DR clarified that the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer only because of the amendment carried out in sec. 80IB(10) of the Act with effect from 1.4.2005. On a further query from the Bench whether the assessee could anticipate the amendment that may be brought in by the Parliament in future while filing the return of income for the year under consideration, the ld. DR very fairly submitted that he leave the matter to the discretion of the Bench.
ITA No. 2531/14 :- 3 -:
On the contrary, Shri K. Balasubramanian, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee filed the return of income in the regular course claiming deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act as per the law prevalent on the first day of the financial year. The Assessing Officer, in fact, allowed the claim of the assessee u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Subsequently, the Parliament amended sec. 80IB(10) with effect from 1.4.2005. To give effect to the amendment made by the Parliament, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s 148. This Bench of this Tribunal examined the amendment brought in by the Parliament in the assessee’s own case in I.T.A.No.2146/Mds/2012 for the assessment year 2006-07. This Tribunal found that since the assessee’s housing project was approved on 19.12.2003 before the amendment of sec. 80IB(10), the amended provision is not applicable for the present project of the assessee.
The ld. Counsel further submitted that the assessee could not anticipate the amendment that may be brought in by the Parliament in future. Therefore, the amendment brought in subsequent to the filing of the return of income cannot be a reason to reopen the assessment.
Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly found that the reopening of assessment is also bad in law.
ITA No. 2531/14 :- 4 -:
We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. The assessee is engaged in development of housing project which is eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The project of the assessee was approved by the local authorities on 19.12.2003. In fact, the Assessing Officer allowed the deduction claimed u/s 80IB(10)of the Act on the basis of the original return filed by the assessee. The dispute arises after the amendment carried out by the Parliament in sec.
80IB(10) with effect from 1.4.2005. As rightly submitted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the assessee is not expected to anticipate an amendment that may be brought in by the Parliament in future. When the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act on the basis of law which is existent on the first day of the financial year, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the claim cannot be disallowed merely because a subsequent amendment was brought in by the Parliament. Therefore, as rightly found by this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for assessment year 2006-07 in respect of the housing project which was approved before 1.4.2005, the provisions of sec. 80IB(10) as brought in by the Parliament with effect from 1.4.2005 is not applicable. Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any ITA No. 2531/14 :- 5 -: reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority. Accordingly, the same is confirmed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.