CIT v. Vandana Properties

DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Saf Yeast Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

…ial interpretation by the ITAT in the case of SIAL SBEC Bioenergy Ltd. vs. DCIT (2004) 83 TTJ 866(Del) has held that ‘steam’ is a form of ‘power’ as contemplated in Section 80-IA of the Act. This order is upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court reported in (2013) 353 ITR 36. In the case of SIAL SEBC Bioenergy case the assessee earned money from supply of power to SBEC Sugar Ltd and after whatever power was consumed by SBEC Sugar Ltd., the surplus power remaining was supplied to the U.P. State Electricity Board. Apart from the receipts generated through the supply of power, the assessee also received some amount on ac…

DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Saf Yeast Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

…ial interpretation by the ITAT in the case of SIAL SBEC Bioenergy Ltd. vs. DCIT (2004) 83 TTJ 866(Del) has held that ‘steam’ is a form of ‘power’ as contemplated in Section 80-IA of the Act. This order is upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court reported in (2013) 353 ITR 36. In the case of SIAL SEBC Bioenergy case the assessee earned money from supply of power to SBEC Sugar Ltd and after whatever power was consumed by SBEC Sugar Ltd., the surplus power remaining was supplied to the U.P. State Electricity Board. Apart from the receipts generated through the supply of power, the assessee also received some amount on ac…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

…ial interpretation by the ITAT in the case of SIAL SBEC Bioenergy Ltd. vs. DCIT (2004) 83 TTJ 866(Del) has held that ‘steam’ is a form of ‘power’ as contemplated in Section 80-IA of the Act. This order is upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court reported in (2013) 353 ITR 36. In the case of SIAL SEBC Bioenergy case the assessee earned money from supply of power to SBEC Sugar Ltd and after whatever power was consumed by SBEC Sugar Ltd., the surplus power remaining was supplied to the U.P. State Electricity Board. Apart from the receipts generated through the supply of power, the assessee also received some amount on ac…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

…ial interpretation by the ITAT in the case of SIAL SBEC Bioenergy Ltd. vs. DCIT (2004) 83 TTJ 866(Del) has held that ‘steam’ is a form of ‘power’ as contemplated in Section 80-IA of the Act. This order is upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court reported in (2013) 353 ITR 36. In the case of SIAL SEBC Bioenergy case the assessee earned money from supply of power to SBEC Sugar Ltd and after whatever power was consumed by SBEC Sugar Ltd., the surplus power remaining was supplied to the U.P. State Electricity Board. Apart from the receipts generated through the supply of power, the assessee also received some amount on ac…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

…ial interpretation by the ITAT in the case of SIAL SBEC Bioenergy Ltd. vs. DCIT (2004) 83 TTJ 866(Del) has held that ‘steam’ is a form of ‘power’ as contemplated in Section 80-IA of the Act. This order is upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court reported in (2013) 353 ITR 36. In the case of SIAL SEBC Bioenergy case the assessee earned money from supply of power to SBEC Sugar Ltd and after whatever power was consumed by SBEC Sugar Ltd., the surplus power remaining was supplied to the U.P. State Electricity Board. Apart from the receipts generated through the supply of power, the assessee also received some amount on ac…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

…ial interpretation by the ITAT in the case of SIAL SBEC Bioenergy Ltd. vs. DCIT (2004) 83 TTJ 866(Del) has held that ‘steam’ is a form of ‘power’ as contemplated in Section 80-IA of the Act. This order is upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court reported in (2013) 353 ITR 36. In the case of SIAL SEBC Bioenergy case the assessee earned money from supply of power to SBEC Sugar Ltd and after whatever power was consumed by SBEC Sugar Ltd., the surplus power remaining was supplied to the U.P. State Electricity Board. Apart from the receipts generated through the supply of power, the assessee also received some amount on ac…

ITO 33(3)(1), Mumbai vs. R.J. Constructon, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer R.J. Construction 3Rd Floor, C-10 R. No. 305 Bkc A-101 Krishant Bldg Opp Apollo Mumbai-400051 Vs. Hospital M.G. Rd, Kandivlai (W) Mumbai-400067 Pan No. Aaafr4765R Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Keyuri Desai,Ar Revenue By .. Aarsi Prasad, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 21-06-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 12-07-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

…f land which has a minimum area of 1 acre, when we find that the entire project was on a land of 2.53 acre this issue has been answered by the Page 6 of 10 R.J. Construction A.Y:03-04s Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vandana Properties (2013) 353 ITR 36 (Bom), wherein Bombay Hon’ble High Court held as under: - “26. The object of Section 80IB (10) in granting deduction equal to one hundred per cent of the profits of an undertaking arising from developing and constructing a housing project is with a view to boost the stock of houses for lower and middle income groups subject to fulfilling the spec…

DCIT 22(2), Navi Mumbai vs. Rajesh Builders, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…not submitted any plan for block ‘D’ which is a commercial building and not completed and for which no deduction was claimed by the assessee. We find that this issue is answered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vandana Properties (2013) 353 ITR 36 (Bom) Wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court has considered as under:- Page 28 of 33 ITA No.2954 & 2955, 6131 & 3454/Mum/2012 Rajesh Builder s (AYs:04-05,05-06,07-08,08-09) “25. The question, therefore, to be considered is, whether the Revenue is justified in reading the expression 'plot of land' in Section 80IB (10)(b) as 'vacant plot of land' ? 26…

Rajesh Builder, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…not submitted any plan for block ‘D’ which is a commercial building and not completed and for which no deduction was claimed by the assessee. We find that this issue is answered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vandana Properties (2013) 353 ITR 36 (Bom) Wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court has considered as under:- Page 28 of 33 ITA No.2954 & 2955, 6131 & 3454/Mum/2012 Rajesh Builder s (AYs:04-05,05-06,07-08,08-09) “25. The question, therefore, to be considered is, whether the Revenue is justified in reading the expression 'plot of land' in Section 80IB (10)(b) as 'vacant plot of land' ? 26…

Rajesh Builder, Mumbai vs. CIT 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…not submitted any plan for block ‘D’ which is a commercial building and not completed and for which no deduction was claimed by the assessee. We find that this issue is answered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vandana Properties (2013) 353 ITR 36 (Bom) Wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court has considered as under:- Page 28 of 33 ITA No.2954 & 2955, 6131 & 3454/Mum/2012 Rajesh Builder s (AYs:04-05,05-06,07-08,08-09) “25. The question, therefore, to be considered is, whether the Revenue is justified in reading the expression 'plot of land' in Section 80IB (10)(b) as 'vacant plot of land' ? 26…

Mahavir Enterprises, Navi Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 28, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S. Mahavir Enterprises, The Emerald, 3Rd Floor, Plot No.195B, Sector -12. Vashi, Navi Mumbai 400703 Pan:Aakfm7869D ...... Appellant Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -28, Tower No.6, 3Rd Floor, Room No.4, Vashi Rly. Station Complex, Vashi Navi Mumbai 400703 .... Respondent

…10) of the Act, the same can be considered as a project for the purposes of availment of deduction under section 80 IB(10) of the Act. In this context, he has referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vandana Properties, 353 ITR 36(Bom) to point out that even one building with several residential unit can constitute a housing project for the purposes of section 80 IB(10) of the Act, provided the same is otherwise in compliance with the conditions of section 80 IB(10) of the Act. It was, thus, contended that the CIT has wrongly observed that the entire ‘Balaji Garden’ complex…

DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai vs. Purvankara Projects Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…essee has been maintaining separate accounts for each of the projects. He further submitted that each of the projects should be taken as separate undertakings as held in the case of Viswas Promoters (214 Taxmann 525)(Mad) and CIT Vs. Vandana Properties (2013)(353 ITR 36)(Bom). 6 M/s. Purvankara Projects Ltd. 9. We heard Ld D.R. We notice that the AO has treated all the projects as belonging to one undertaking on the reasoning that no separate accounts have been maintained and further the assessee was not able to show that there was no interlacing and interdependence. The Ld A.R submitted that the above said obs…

Savita Builders & Developers, Thane vs. D.C.I.T. Circle-4, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2882/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) M/S Savita Builders & The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Developers, Of Income Tax – Central V. Sakharam Baba Sankul, Circle – 4, Bolinji, Thane. Near Union Bank, Virar (W), Taluka – Vasai, Dist Thane – 401 303. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aayfs1480N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2882/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) M/s Savita Builders and The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Developers, of Income Tax – Central v. Sakharam Baba Sankul, Circle – 4, Bolinji, Thane. Near Union Bank, Virar (W), Taluka – Vasai, Dist Thane – 401 303. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAYFS1480N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri Anil Sathe Revenue by : Shri Vishwas Jadhav (D.R.) सुन…

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

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

…relatable to building A-4. The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the assessee’s claim following the decision by the first appellate authority 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 un…

Rupvakula Properites P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…te housing project, hence, each building completed on / or before 31st March 2008 being a separate housing project would be eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10). In this regard, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Vandana Properties, 353 ITR 36 (Bom.); and ii) Vishwas Properties P. Ltd. v/s ACIT, 255 CTR 149 (Mad.). 6. Learned Authorised Representative further submitted, though as per the Assessing Officer the assessee may not have fulfilled the condition of completing the entire housing project consisting of eleven projects but still the assessee would be eligible to claim deduction in…

People Infocom Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. C.I.T. Cir.7, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2007-08 People Infocom Private Ltd. Cit-7, C/O- Samria & Co. Room No.611, बनाम/ Chartered Accountants, 6Th Floor, Vs. 2E, Court Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, 35, New Marine Lines, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aadcp5658H (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ सी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जोिग"दर "सह, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य, के सम" । Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member Assessment Year-2007-08 People Infocom Private Ltd. CIT-7, C/O- Samria & Co. Room No.611, बनाम/ Chartered Accountants, 6th Floor, Vs. 2E, Court Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, 35, New Marine Lines, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 PAN No.AADCP5658H (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri R.S.Samria Shri M.Dayasagar CIT-DR राज"व…

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

…Vs CIT 243 ITR 83 (SC), CIT vs Max India Ltd. 295 ITR 282 (SC). On the issue of Cluster of buildings from out of large layout and eligibility for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the ld. counsel placed reliance upon the decision in CIT vs Vandana Properties 353 ITR 36 (Bom.), DCIT vs Karunal P. Gala (ITA No.7724/Mum/2010) order dated 03/08/2012, Madhur M. Gupta vs ACIT (51 DTR 217)(Mum.)(2011), DCIT vs Magarpatta Township Development and Construction Co. 141 ITD 682 (Pune)(2012), M/s Rahul Construction Company vs ITO (ITA No.1250/Pn/2009 and 707/PN/2010) order dated 30/03/2012 of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal,…

ACIT, Cent. Cir.2, Thane vs. Sai Home Makers, Navi Mumbai

In the result, assessee‟s appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

…other flats which fulfills the conditions of section 80IB(10). For arriving at a just and proper conclusion on the aforesaid issue, it is necessary and expedient to refer to some of the decisions placed before us. In case of CIT v/s Vandana Properties, [2013] 353 ITR 36 (Bom.), the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that housing project comprises of several independent buildings consisting of several residential units. Therefore, even if one of the building in a housing project comprising of several residential units satisfies the conditions of section 80IB(10) assessee would be eligible for deduction. Simila…