CIT Bhopal v. Global Reality

379 ITR 107High Court2015#6674 most cited
17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 80IB(10)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ib(10)section 80ibsection 80isection 80scrutiny assessmentprevious yearprescribedinterestdocumentsection 143(3)business

Judgments citing CIT Bhopal v. Global Reality

M/S SAHARA STATES,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 22/IND/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani&

Section 143(3)Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & ITANo.22/Ind/2012 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Sahara States (AOP) ACIT -1(1) Bhojpur Road, 11 Mills, Near Bhopal Vs. Water Park, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AABAS9296C Assessee by Shri, P.K. Bansal, AR Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, CIT- DR Revenue by Date of Hearing 05.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 27.09.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : These two appeals by assessee are directed against two separate order…

M/S SAHARA STATES,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 271/IND/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani&

Section 143(3)Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & ITANo.22/Ind/2012 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Sahara States (AOP) ACIT -1(1) Bhojpur Road, 11 Mills, Near Bhopal Vs. Water Park, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AABAS9296C Assessee by Shri, P.K. Bansal, AR Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, CIT- DR Revenue by Date of Hearing 05.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 27.09.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : These two appeals by assessee are directed against two separate order…

D.K CONSTRUCTION,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2 (3), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 23/IND/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanid. K Construction Ito 2(3) E 2/21, Pandit Deeendayal Bhopal Complex, Arera Colony, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaafd7121P Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit- Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09 .09.2024

Section 158A(1)Section 256Section 257Section 261Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…was issued by the local authority on 24.12.2010 mentioning project was completed on 31.03.2008. However, the CIT(A) has disallowed the claim of the assessee by following decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT vs. Global Reality reported 379 ITR 107. The Finding of the CIT(A) in para 3.2.3 & 3.2.4 is as under: “3.2.3 Considering entire factual matrix, it can safely be held that the completion certificate for the said project was to be acquired on or before the specified date i.e. 31.03.2008, however, the same was issued by local authority on 24.12.2010. Hon'ble High Court of MP in the case…

SHRI ABHAY DARE,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 832/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Abhay Dare Ito-1(1) R-18, Gtb Complex Bhopal New Market, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adqpd5119C Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2024

Section 801BSection 801B(10)Section 80I

…anks/financial institutions. 5.2 So far as the issue of completion certificate is concerned this issue is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Global Reality decided by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court against the assessee in 379 ITR 107 and further appeal is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also brought to the notice of the Bench that operation of the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court has been stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances of the case where one of the issue is pending adjudication before Ho…

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S.GOLDEN TRELLIS DEVELOPMENTS,, PUNE

In the result, both appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2550/PUN/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No’S.2549 & 2550/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, M/S.Golden Trellis Ward-2(2), Pune. Vs Developments, S.No.38(1), 779, Balewadi, Pune – 411045. Pan: Aaaag 6124 C Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe & Shri Shivraj B More – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 26/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune, Dated 08.08.2016 & 12.08.2016 For The A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. The Appellant Revenue In A.Y.2012-13 Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Assessee Claim Of Deduction Of Rs.24,39,34,737/- U/S 80Ib(10) For A.Y.2012-13, When The Assessee Had Failed To Obtain The Completion Certificate From The Local Authority Within The Stipulated Due Date 31.03.2012 As Per Provisions Of Section 80Ib(10)(A) Of The I.T.Act, 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate The Fact The That The Occupancy Certificate

Section 80I

…2550/PUN/2016for A.Y. 2012-13 & 13-14 M/s.Golden Trellis Developments (R) Hindusthan Samuh Awas Ltd 62taxmann.com175(Bom) Span SM Developers ITA 46/Pune/2010 Ambey Developrs P Ltd 399ITR216(P&H) Gera Development P Ltd ITA 598/Pune/2013 CIT vs Global reality 379 ITR 107 (MP) Ujjwal Construction ITA 607/Pune/2011 Kumar Builders Consortium ITA 1128/Pn/2012 6. DR’s Submission : The Ld.Ddepartmental Representative for the Revenue(ld.DR) explained that as per the Act, to claim deduction u/s 80IB (10) the project should have been completed on or before 31/03/2012. The Ld.DR explained that the “Project” means the enti…

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S.GOLDEN TRELLIS DEVELOPMENTS,, PUNE

In the result, both appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2549/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No’S.2549 & 2550/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, M/S.Golden Trellis Ward-2(2), Pune. Vs Developments, S.No.38(1), 779, Balewadi, Pune – 411045. Pan: Aaaag 6124 C Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe & Shri Shivraj B More – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 26/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune, Dated 08.08.2016 & 12.08.2016 For The A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. The Appellant Revenue In A.Y.2012-13 Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Assessee Claim Of Deduction Of Rs.24,39,34,737/- U/S 80Ib(10) For A.Y.2012-13, When The Assessee Had Failed To Obtain The Completion Certificate From The Local Authority Within The Stipulated Due Date 31.03.2012 As Per Provisions Of Section 80Ib(10)(A) Of The I.T.Act, 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate The Fact The That The Occupancy Certificate

Section 80I

…2550/PUN/2016for A.Y. 2012-13 & 13-14 M/s.Golden Trellis Developments (R) Hindusthan Samuh Awas Ltd 62taxmann.com175(Bom) Span SM Developers ITA 46/Pune/2010 Ambey Developrs P Ltd 399ITR216(P&H) Gera Development P Ltd ITA 598/Pune/2013 CIT vs Global reality 379 ITR 107 (MP) Ujjwal Construction ITA 607/Pune/2011 Kumar Builders Consortium ITA 1128/Pn/2012 6. DR’s Submission : The Ld.Ddepartmental Representative for the Revenue(ld.DR) explained that as per the Act, to claim deduction u/s 80IB (10) the project should have been completed on or before 31/03/2012. The Ld.DR explained that the “Project” means the enti…

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 15/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80I

…t that obtaining of completion certificate is mandatory and without the same, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of t…

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 956/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80I

…t that obtaining of completion certificate is mandatory and without the same, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of t…

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1554/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80I

…t that obtaining of completion certificate is mandatory and without the same, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of t…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA SAHKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2481/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT, DR
Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2481 & 2482/Del/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 DCIT, Vs Sahara India Sahkari Awas Central Circle-6, Samiti Ltd., Room No.334, Sahara Bhawan, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., 1, Kapoorthala Complex, New Delhi. Aliganj, Lucknow. PAN: AAGFS9137D CO Nos.221 & 222/Del/2011 (ITA Nos.2481 & 2482/Del/2011) Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 Sahara India Sahkari Awas Vs. DCIT, Samiti Ltd., Central Circle-6, Sahara Bhawan, Room No.334, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, A…

M/S. SHIPRA ESTATE LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result ground number 4 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed and ground number [3]

ITA 740/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shipra Estate Ltd, Vs Acit, C/O. Pradeep & Co, Circle-2, Tax Advocates, Ghaziabad 7, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad Pan: Aaccs6116J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary [CIT]–DR
Section 234BSection 234CSection 80Section 80I

…Court and Hon’ble Karnataka High Court. He further referred to a decision from paper book where several decisions of the co-ordinate bench were relied upon. He further stated that the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT Vs. Global Reality 379 ITR 107 (M.P.) relied upon heavily by the ld. CIT (Appeals) for confirming the disallowance of deduction has already been stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 8.07.2019. He, therefore, submitted that this decision cannot be applied to the facts of the case of the assessee. He further even distinguished the facts of that case and stated th…

ITO WD 2(3), KALYAN vs. NANCY ICON BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, ULHASNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6491/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2018AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 80I

…Versus ITO (ITA No.1250/PN/2009 and ITA No.707/PN/2010) dated 30.03.2010, DCIT Vs Anand Ashok Gandhi (ITA No. 2004/PN/2014 dated 27.05.2016, Saroj Sales Organisation Vs ITO (2008) 115 TTJ 485(Mum) and Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT versus Global Reality 379 ITR 107( MP) (2015). 4. On the other hand the learned AR for the assessee supported the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The ld. AR for the assessee further submits that on the basis of same facts the assessing officer allowed deduction under section 80IB in assessment year 2008-09. The claim of ITA 6491/M2012 & ITA No. 7059/M/2014 Nancy…

MANJEERA PROJECTS, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1082/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…t that obtaining of completion certificate is mandatory and without the same, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of…

MANJEERA PROJECTS, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1230/HYD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…t that obtaining of completion certificate is mandatory and without the same, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of…

MANJEERA PROJECTS,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-6(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1704/HYD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…t that obtaining of completion certificate is mandatory and without the same, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of…

DCIT CEN CIR 1, THANE vs. PURANIK BUILDES P.LTD, THANE

ITA 385/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita.S./385-386/Mum/2015, आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08,2008-09 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit-Circle-2 M/S. Puranik Builders Pvt. Ltd. Room No.13, A-Wing, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Puranik-One, Kanchan Pushpa, Opp. Suraj Park,Wagle Indl Estate, Water Park, Next To Coral Square Vs. Thane-(W)-400 064 Building, Kavesar,Gb Road, Thane(W)-400615. Pan:Aabcp 0109 R Revenue By:Shri N. Sathya Moorthy -Dr Assessee By: None सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) "" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार राजे"" "" "" लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे राजे Challenging The Orders,Dated 25/06/2014,Of The Cit(A)-I,Thane The Assessing Officers(Ao.S)Have Filed The Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Ay.S.Assessee- Company Is A Builder & Developer. The Details Of The Dates Of Filing Of Returns Of Income, Returned Incomes & Assessed Incomes,Etc. Can Be Summarised As Under: A.Y. Roi Filed On Returned Assessment Dt. Assessed Dt. Of Orders Income(Rs.) Income(Rs.) Of Cit(A) 2007-08 30.10.2007 57,95,050/- 28.03.2013 2,15,82,568/- 25.06.2014 2008-09 24.09.2008 15,69,349/- 28.03.2013 1,50,63,043/- 25.06.2014

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy -DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 80

…the assessee after the due date i.e.31.3.2008 in case of KP and therefore, the assessee was not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 80IB(10). The FAA held that amended provisions were not applicable to KP. We find that the Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of (379 ITR 107) Global Reality has dealt the issue extensively.Facts of the case were that the AO had disallowed the claim of the assessee u/s.80-IB(10) on the finding that in spite of repeated opportunity given to the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings, the completion certificate was not produced before 31.03.2008. Further, a letter was issue…

DCIT 3, THANE vs. PURANIK BUILDERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4612/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shjoginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./4612/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit, Range-3, Room No.2, B-Wing, M/S. Puranik Builders Pvt. Ltd. 6Th Floor Ashar It Park, Road No.16Z, M/S. Vmd & Co. Avms Premises, 4Th Floor, Shree Niwas House Wagle Estate,Thane. Vs. H.S. Marg,Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aabcp 0109 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ""या"ेप ""या"ेप ""या"ेप/C.O/.No.205/M/2014,Ay.2009-10, ""या"ेप M/S. Puranik Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Range-3 Thane. Mumbai-400 001. (Cross Objector) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Love Kumar-Dr Assessee By: Ms. Uma Mahadeokar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 29.06.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dt.13.02.2013 Of Cit(A)-I,Mumbai, The Assessing Officer(A.O.)And The Assessee Have Filed The Present Appeal/Cross Objection (C.O.).During The Course Of Hearing Before Us, The Ar Of The Assessee Stated That Assessee Was Not Interested In Pressing The Grounds Raised In The Co,Considering The Smallness Of Tax Effect.Therefore,C.O. Filed By The Assessee,Stands Dismissed As Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Ms. Uma MahadeokarFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 80I

…he assessee after the due date i.e. 31.3.2008 in case of KP and therefore, the assessee was not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 80IB(10). The FAA held that amended provisions were not applicable to KP. We find that the Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of (379 ITR 107) Global Reality has dealt the issue extensively.Facts of the case were that the AO had disallowed the claim of the assessee under section 80-IB(10) on the finding that in spite of repeated opportunity given to the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings, the completion certificate was not produced before 31.03.2008. Further, a letter…

CIT Bhopal v. Global Reality (379 ITR 107) — Cited in 17 Judgments | BharatTax