CIT v. Brahma Associates

Akash Enterprise, Thane vs. I.T.O. Ward-4(1), Thane

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2007-08 M/S Akash Enterprises, Income Tax Officer, Shop No.27/A, Bldg. No.1, Ward-4(1), बनाम/ Akashganga Apts. 02Nd Floor Vs. Shriprastha Complex, Qureshi Mansion, Nallasopara (W), Tal Vasai, Gokhale Road, Dist-Thane-401203 Thane Pan No.Aalfa4071C ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Assessment Year-2007-08 Income Tax Officer, M/S Akash Enterprises, Ward-4(1), Shop No.27/A, Bldg. बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, No.1, Akashganga Apts. Vs. Qureshi Mansion, Shriprastha Complex, Gokhale Road, Nallasopara (W), Tal Thane Vasai, Dist-Thane- 401203 Pan No.Aalfa4071C (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) M/S Akash Enterprises.

…be admissible when commercial establishment is constructed in a housing project? That is, whether it would still retain the character of housing project within the meaning of this provision. The Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Brahma Associates [2011] 333 ITR 289/197 Taxman 459/9 taxmann.com 289 held that since the expression 'housing project' is not defined under the Act, the intention of Parliament was that whatever is approved by the local authority under the extent rules as a housing project would be treated as 'housing project' for the purpose of this Section, inasmuch as sub-section (10) itself mand…

Addl CIT RG 15(1), Mumbai vs. Bhumiraj Constructions, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 Jcit(Osd), M/S Bhumiraj Constructions Circle-15(1), D/5-6, Big Splash, बनाम/ Room No.104, Matru Mandir, Sector-17, Vs. 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Navi Mumbai-400703 Mumbai-400007 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaffb3546H Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Bhumiraj Constructions Jcit(Osd), D/5-6, Big Splash, Circle-15(1), बनाम/ Sector-17, Room No.104, Matru Mandir, Vs. Navi Mumbai-400703 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaffb3546H

…sary details before the ld. Assessing Officer and clear the factual matrix. The ld. Assessing Officer is directed to examine the claim of the assessee in accordance with law, considering the decision from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Brahma Associates 333 ITR 289 (Bom.) and CIT vs Veena Developers (2015) (277 CTR 297) (SC) order dated 30/04/2015. Needless to mention here that the assessee be provided due opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to furnish necessary evidence, if any, in support of its claim, thus, this appeal of the assessee, as agreed from both sides, is allowed for statisti…

ITO WD 2(4), Thane vs. Shiv Om Universal, Badlapur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

…thority in the assessee’s case for A.Y. 2009-10, wherein reference is made to the following decisions: CIT vs. Vandana Properties [2013] 353 ITR 36 (Bom); Vishwas Promoters (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2013] 29 Taxmann.com 19 (Mad); and CIT vs. Brahma Associates [2011] 333 ITR 289 (Bom) 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record, including the cited judgments. 3.1 We begin by reproducing the provision as under: ‘Deduction in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial undertakings other than infrastructure development undertakings. 80-IB. (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee inclu…

ITO WD 2(3), Thane vs. Dream House Realtors, Thane

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.138/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year : 2004-05) ITO Ward -2(3), M/s Dream house Realtors, 6th Floor, “B” Wing, Shop No.7, Neel Akar Ganga, Room No. 13, Ashar I.T. Park, Ground Floor, Laxmi Park, Naya Road No. 16-Z, Nr. Ambika Nagar, Mira Road (E), Thane. Vs. Nagar, Wagle Estate, Thane-400604. PAN: AADFD9736B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Revenue by Mr. Naveen Gupta (DR) Assessee by None Date of Hearing : 17.08.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 19.08.2016 O R D E R D.KAR…

ACIT Cen Cir 2, Thane vs. Salasar Developers, Thane

In the result, the questions raised in the appeal are answered thus:—

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2271/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Salasar Developers, Asst. Cit-11, बनाम/ Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Salasar Thane Brijbhoomi, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Bhayander (W), Thane-401 101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs 6465 R (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2939/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-11, Salasar Developers, Thane Thane-401 101 Vs. (Revenue) (Assessee) : : Shri Virag H. Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Mohammed Rizwan सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 12.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Thane (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26.12.2012, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 09.12.2011. 2

…is again not valid. It needs to be emphasized that the character of the project, given the extent of the commercial area (8% of the total built-up area) is principally residential. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has in CIT vs. Brahma Associates [2011] 333 ITR 289 (Bom) clarified that the amendment (by Finance (No.2) Act, 2009) w.e.f. 01.4.2010 to section 80-IB(10)(d), prescribing a limit or cap on the commercial area, is prospective, so that it would apply from A.Y. 2010-11 onwards. The same shall have no application for years prior to that year. This would also meet the Revenue’s argument of the impugned…

Salasar Developers, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2, Thane

In the result, the questions raised in the appeal are answered thus:—

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2271/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Salasar Developers, Asst. Cit-11, बनाम/ Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Salasar Thane Brijbhoomi, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Bhayander (W), Thane-401 101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs 6465 R (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2939/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-11, Salasar Developers, Thane Thane-401 101 Vs. (Revenue) (Assessee) : : Shri Virag H. Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Mohammed Rizwan सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 12.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Thane (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26.12.2012, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 09.12.2011. 2

…is again not valid. It needs to be emphasized that the character of the project, given the extent of the commercial area (8% of the total built-up area) is principally residential. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has in CIT vs. Brahma Associates [2011] 333 ITR 289 (Bom) clarified that the amendment (by Finance (No.2) Act, 2009) w.e.f. 01.4.2010 to section 80-IB(10)(d), prescribing a limit or cap on the commercial area, is prospective, so that it would apply from A.Y. 2010-11 onwards. The same shall have no application for years prior to that year. This would also meet the Revenue’s argument of the impugned…

ITO 25(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Swastik Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 226/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2005-06 The Ito-25(2)(3), M/S. Swastik Developers, बनाम/ Bldg. C-11, Pratyakshakar A/102, Raj Crystal, Vs. Bhavan, Royal Complex, Bandra Kurla Complex, Eksar Road, Bandra (E), Borivali (W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 092 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aanfs 1662H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri R.K. Sahu ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Virag Shah

…003-04 and 2007-08. The Hon’ble ITAT have based their decision on the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vandana Properties, ITA No. 3633 of 2009 and 4361 of 2010 dated 28.03.2012 and the case of CIT Vs. Brahma Associates (2011) 333 ITR 289. 4. Respectfully following the decisions in the appellants’s own case, the appeal is allowed.” 6. We also find that similar claim of the assessee has been upheld by the Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2004-05 in ITA No. 176/M/2013 dated 19.2.2016 observing as under: 3 12. We have heard the counsel of the parties and perused the orders passed by…

ITO WD 3(4), Kalyan vs. Paresh Construction Co, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalvs. Paresh The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Construction Co., Kalyan Range-3, 2Nd Floor, Rani Shop No.6, Ground Floor, Mansion, Murbad Road, Kalyan (W), Dass Krupa Building, R. P. 421 301 Road, Kalyan (W) 421301 Pan:Aabfp 5209 K .. Appellant Respondent Appellant By .. Ms. Bharti Singh, Dr Respondent By .. Ms. Nikita Agarwal,Ar Date Of Hearing .. 27-07-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 27-07-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

…the order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has confirmed the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal. The CIT (A), following the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Brahma Associates [2011] 333 ITR 289 (Bom) allowed the claim of the assessee vide Para 12 by observing as under:- “12. With regard to the extent of the commercial area in the housing project, it is seen that the ITAT, Special Bench, Pune had held that before 1.04.2005 if the commercial area in a housing project was less than 10%of the total built up area of the project, then no adve…

DCIT 3, Thane vs. Puranik Builders P.Ltd, Mumbai

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.

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी ” ” ” ” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “ C ”Bench Mumbai सव"ी जोिग"दर "सह, "याियक सद"य एवं राजे"", लेखा सद"य Before S/ShJoginder Singh,Judicial Member & Rajendra,Accountant Member आयकर 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,…

ITO 25(2)(2)), Mumbai vs. Prathmesh Realtors, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed on the afore-said terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3382/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer-25(2)(2), Prathmesh Realtors बनाम/ C-11, Bldg., Room No. 106, A-101, Sweta Park, Daulat Nagar Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Kurla Complex, Road No. 2, Borivali (E), Vs. Bandra(E), Mumbai-51 Mumbai-400 066 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaifp 8580 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Pandian ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Tarun Ghia सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.03.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 10.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-35, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 14.2.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 12.3.2013. 2. The First Issue Under Appeal (Raised Vide Grounds 1 & 2) Is The Validity Or Otherwise In Law Of The Proportionate Deduction To The Assessee’S, A Builder & Developer, Housing Project By The Name ‘Prathmesh Heritage’, At Mira Road (E)

…T [2013] 29 taxmann.com 19 (Mad) dated 01.11.2012 (copy on record). 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. Even as clarified by the Bench during hearing, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court has in CIT vs. Brahma Associates [2011] 333 ITR 289 (Bom) clearly held like- wise, i.e., as by the Tribunal in Viswas Promoters (P.) Ltd. (supra), as noted by the tribunal in Asst. CIT vs. Ekta Sankalp Developers [2015] 152 ITD 805 (Mum), reproducing from the said decision (refer para 31 at pgs. 302-303 of the reports) at para 5 of the order: ‘Section 80-IB(10) allows deduction to the entire proje…

Krunal Pravinchandra Gala, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1 Thane, Pune

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

…ravinchandra Gala 31/03/2005, the restriction of commercial area imposed by sub-section (d) to section 80IB(10) is not applicable, for which reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Sarkar Builders (119 DTR 241)(2015)(SC) and CIT vs Brahma Associates (333 ITR 289) (Bom.)(2011). 2.1. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri Sunil K. Jha, defended the invocation of revisional jurisdiction by inviting out attention to page-3 (para-7) of the impugned order by contending that the assessee has not fulfilled the conditions mentioned in sections 80IB(10) and the remaining buildings are part of the same projects, ther…

Ramprasd Agarwal, Thane vs. ITO WD 2(2), Thane

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and both the cross appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-2009

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri. Ramprasad Agarwal, The CIT(Appeals)-I, Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Vardaan, 9th Floor, MIDC, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Wagle Industrial Estate, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Thane. Bhayander(W), Thane- 401101. PAN: AAOPA2405P (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No 1108 & 1773/MUM/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-2009 & 2009-10 The ITO Wd. 2(2), Shri. Ramprasad Agarwal, Room No. 26/B, Ashar IT Park, Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Estate, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Thane- 400604. Vs. Tem…

Ramprasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO Cen Thane, Thane

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and both the cross appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-2009

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri. Ramprasad Agarwal, The CIT(Appeals)-I, Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Vardaan, 9th Floor, MIDC, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Wagle Industrial Estate, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Thane. Bhayander(W), Thane- 401101. PAN: AAOPA2405P (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No 1108 & 1773/MUM/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-2009 & 2009-10 The ITO Wd. 2(2), Shri. Ramprasad Agarwal, Room No. 26/B, Ashar IT Park, Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Estate, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Thane- 400604. Vs. Tem…

ITO WD 2(2), Thane vs. Ramprasad Agarwal, Thane

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and both the cross appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-2009

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri. Ramprasad Agarwal, The CIT(Appeals)-I, Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Vardaan, 9th Floor, MIDC, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Wagle Industrial Estate, Temba Hospital Road, Vs. Thane. Bhayander(W), Thane- 401101. PAN: AAOPA2405P (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No 1108 & 1773/MUM/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-2009 & 2009-10 The ITO Wd. 2(2), Shri. Ramprasad Agarwal, Room No. 26/B, Ashar IT Park, Gr. Flr., Vrindavan, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Estate, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Thane- 400604. Vs. Tem…