CIT-1 v. Moon Star Developers

367 ITR 621High Court2014#17837 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT-1 v. Moon Star Developers

M/S. PRATHAM DEVELOPERS,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

ITA 3086/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Milind Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H.V. Gurjar, CIT-D.R

Section 143(2)Section 801Section 80I

…ase of Radhe Developers & Ors. (supra), I.T.A Nos.2000/Ahd/2014 1533,2673,2769/Ahd/2015,3086/Ahd/2016,283/Ahd/2017,2192&CO158/Ahd/2015 Page 11 ACIT vs. M/s. Pratham Developers Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT-1 V. Moon Star Developers [2014] 367 ITR 621 (Guj.) have considered the decision of Radhe Developers & Ors. (supra) and have given the following findings: "..... However, in cases where the utilization of FSI is way short of the permissible area of construction, looking to the scheme of Section 80IB(10) of the Act and the purpose of granting deduction on the income from development of housi…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. PRATHAM DEVELOPERS, BARODA

ITA 2000/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Milind Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H.V. Gurjar, CIT-D.R

Section 143(2)Section 801Section 80I

M/S. SHREE HARI DEVELOPERS,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(6),, BARODA

In the result, appeal is dismissed subject to the observations as above

ITA 2129/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar] Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 143(3)

…of the Assessing Officer for SMC-ITA No. 2129/Ahd/2014 Shree Hari Developers Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2007-08 Page 2 of 3 fresh adjudication in the light of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court’s decision in the case of CIT vs. Moon Star Developers, [2014] 367 ITR 621 (Guj) and the matter is right now pending before the Assessing Officer. She has two prayers before me i.e. (i) since the SLP is admitted against the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court’s judgement in the case of Moon Star Developers (supra), the Assessing Officer should give due effect to the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as and when ithe judg…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. SHAKTI DEVELOPERS,, BARODA

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2768/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri S. S. Godara. Erstwhile Assessing Officer Acit, Cir.2(2), Baroda Present Assessing Officer The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Circle, Baroda Appellant Vs. M/S. Shakti Developers Saujanya Society, Nr. Vadsar Village, Kalali, Gidc, Vadsar Road, Baroda 390012 Respondent Pan: Aaqfs3259K

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Roopchand, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…maximum permissible FSI is not possible under any circumstances because of height restriction and unutilized FSI just remains on paper. In the case of CIT vs ITA No. 2768/Ahd/15 (DCIT vs. M/s. Shakti Developers) A.Y. 2011-12 - 3 - Moonstar Developers [2014] 367 ITR 621(Guj.), Hon’ble High Court have observed that if there are compelling reasons for under utilization of FSI, deduction cannot be denied on grounds of under utilization even if there is considerable under utilization. The observation of High Court is in para 31 which is as under: 31. It is true that section 80IB(10) of the Act does not provide that…

AARTI PROJECTS AND CONSTRUCTIONS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4190/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Aarti Projects & Vs. Dcit – 5(1), Mumbai Constructions, Ackruti Trade Centre, Road No.7, Marol Midc, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400021 Pan/Gir No. Aaefa5526F Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…project but from sale of unutilized FSI. For arriving at his conclusion the AO has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (317 ITR 218) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Moon Star Developers (367 ITR 621). 5. The AO further observed that since the FSI sold formed part of the project under development, the project could not be said to be completed and, therefore, deduction u/s. 80-IB(10) of the Act was not allowable. 6. As per AO since the FSI sold to each of the persons mentioned in paragraph 2.1.5 of the assessment order was in excess of 1000 sq…