Pr.CIT v. Ambey Developers Pvt Ltd.

399 ITR 216High Court2018#15844 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Judgments citing Pr.CIT v. Ambey Developers Pvt Ltd.

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / 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/ O…

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / 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/ O…

M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, (OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1582/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1582/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Venus Infrastructure & D.C.I.T.,(Osd) Developers (P) Ltd., Vs. Central Circle-8, 801-802, Broadway Business Ahmedabad. Centre, Opp. Mayor’S Bungalow, Law Garden Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aahcs6254J

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimal Sinh B. Parmar, &For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT.D.R
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…ar Corporation - (2012) 362 rTR 174 (Gujarat) (Annexure "B"); ITO vs. Saket Corporation - (2015) 234 Taxman 435 (Gujarat) (Annexure "C"); CIT vs. Hindustan Samuh Awas Ltd. - (2015) 377 ITR 150 (Bombay) (Annexure "D"); PCIT vs. Ambcy Developer P. Ltd. - (2018) 399 ITR 216 (P&H) (Annexure “E"); In view of (he above, deduction u/s 80-IB(10) cannot be denied to the assessee especially when there is no fault on the part of the assessee and when delay in getting BU permission cannot be attributable to the assessee. Hence, CIT(A) has rightly allowed deduction u/s 80-IB(10). Other issues raised by AO: As regards Ground #…

K.RAHEJA IT PARK (HYDERABAD) PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 691/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahushri Assessment Year: 2011-12 K. Raheja It Park ` Dy. Commissioner Of (Hyderabad) Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aacck 1914G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta & Ms. Aarthi Sathe Revenue By Shri Yvst Sai Date Of Hearing: 18/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/05/2021

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…n following decisions in support of the proposition that the relevant date is the date of application made by the assessee; a) CIT v. Tarnetar Corporation 362 ITR 174 (Guj) b) CIT v. Ceebros Hotels P. Ltd. 409 ITR 423 (Mad) c) PCIT v. Ambey Developers P. Ltd. 399 ITR 216 (P&H) 56. Further, we would like to draw Your Honours' attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Samuh Awas Ltd [2015] [62 taxmann.com 175 (Bombay)] (a copy of the said order has been enclosed as Annexure 7) wherein it is held that if an application is moved quite in time, for seeking completion ce…

DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BENGAL AMBUJA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1298/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 27

…at the assessee shall be entitled to deduction claimed under section 80IB(10) of the Act.” 23. In this regard, we may also gainfully refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs Ambey Developers Pvt Ltd reported in 399 ITR 216. The relevant observations are as follows: “Adverting to the interpretation and meaning to be assigned to Explanation (ii) to section 80-IB(10(a) of the Act, essentially it has to be seen whether the term "shall" used therein is to be treated as mandatory or it is in the nature of a directory requirement. In our opinion, though the word used in E…

DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BENGAL AMBUJA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1514/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri A.L.Saini, Am]

Section 80ISection 80i

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri A.L.Saini, AM] I.TA No. 1514/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 And I.TA No. 1515/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Cir-12(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd. PAN: AABCB0977F Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 01.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 18. 10 .2019 For the Appellant Dr. (Shri ) P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld.DR For the Respondent Shri D.S.Damle, FCA & Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA, ld.ARs ORDER PER SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM These appeals are preferred by the Revenue against the separate o…

Pr.CIT v. Ambey Developers Pvt Ltd. (399 ITR 216) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax