Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture v. ACIT

159 TTJ 390Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2014#6675 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)

Judgments citing Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture v. ACIT

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHIPRA ESTATE LTD. & JAI KRISHAN ESTATE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of

ITA 3926/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3569/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 बनाम Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Acit Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Circle-58(1), C/O Pradeep & Co., Tax Advocate, New Delhi. 7, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Pan No.Abgfs9748C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3926/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 बनाम Acit Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Vs. Circle-58(1), Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd., Room No.218, D-32, Main Vikas Marg, D-Block, Vikas Bhawan, Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Abgfs9748C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 801Section 80I

…l order submits that Tribunal following the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Vishwas Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT [255 CTR 149] and also the decision of the Pune Bench of ITAT in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture Vs. ACIT [159 TTJ 390] dismissed the ground of the Revenue. 15. Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 16. Heard rival submissions, perused the order of the authorities below and the order of the Tribunal. We observe that the Tribunal decided this ground in favour of the assessee observing as under: - “34. As far as the issue of requirement of a…

M/S. SHIPRA ESTATE LTD. & JAI KRISHAN ESTATE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of

ITA 3569/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3569/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 बनाम Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Acit Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Circle-58(1), C/O Pradeep & Co., Tax Advocate, New Delhi. 7, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Pan No.Abgfs9748C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3926/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 बनाम Acit Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Vs. Circle-58(1), Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd., Room No.218, D-32, Main Vikas Marg, D-Block, Vikas Bhawan, Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Abgfs9748C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 801Section 80I

…l order submits that Tribunal following the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Vishwas Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT [255 CTR 149] and also the decision of the Pune Bench of ITAT in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture Vs. ACIT [159 TTJ 390] dismissed the ground of the Revenue. 15. Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 16. Heard rival submissions, perused the order of the authorities below and the order of the Tribunal. We observe that the Tribunal decided this ground in favour of the assessee observing as under: - “34. As far as the issue of requirement of a…

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

…ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member AND Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1554, 956/Hyd/2018, 1599/Hyd/2019 & 15/Hyd/2020 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Manjeera Projects Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) PAN:AAOFM0872C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri K.C. Devdas Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR Date of hearing: 26/08/2021 Date of pronouncement: 08/09/2021 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.…

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

…ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member AND Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1554, 956/Hyd/2018, 1599/Hyd/2019 & 15/Hyd/2020 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Manjeera Projects Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) PAN:AAOFM0872C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri K.C. Devdas Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR Date of hearing: 26/08/2021 Date of pronouncement: 08/09/2021 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.…

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

…ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member AND Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1554, 956/Hyd/2018, 1599/Hyd/2019 & 15/Hyd/2020 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Manjeera Projects Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) PAN:AAOFM0872C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri K.C. Devdas Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR Date of hearing: 26/08/2021 Date of pronouncement: 08/09/2021 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.…

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

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…

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

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…

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

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1576/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…struction vs. ITO, ITA No. 243/Ind/2010, dt. 6.12.2010, ITAT Indore Bench, BCAJ p. 24, Vol. 42-B, Part 5, February 2011. (Trib.) • RNS Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy. CIT: [2012] 54 SOT 94 (Bangalore -Trib.) • Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture [TS-590-ITAT-2013(PUN)]/159 TTJ 390 25. Ld. DR relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 26. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. Section 80IB(10) prior to its substitution by the Finance (No.2), 2004 w.e.f. 01.04.2005 as amended by the Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 01.04.2002 read as under…

THE ACIT.,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1254/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…struction vs. ITO, ITA No. 243/Ind/2010, dt. 6.12.2010, ITAT Indore Bench, BCAJ p. 24, Vol. 42-B, Part 5, February 2011. (Trib.) • RNS Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy. CIT: [2012] 54 SOT 94 (Bangalore -Trib.) • Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture [TS-590-ITAT-2013(PUN)]/159 TTJ 390 25. Ld. DR relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 26. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. Section 80IB(10) prior to its substitution by the Finance (No.2), 2004 w.e.f. 01.04.2005 as amended by the Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 01.04.2002 read as under…

ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1248/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…struction vs. ITO, ITA No. 243/Ind/2010, dt. 6.12.2010, ITAT Indore Bench, BCAJ p. 24, Vol. 42-B, Part 5, February 2011. (Trib.) • RNS Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy. CIT: [2012] 54 SOT 94 (Bangalore -Trib.) • Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture [TS-590-ITAT-2013(PUN)]/159 TTJ 390 25. Ld. DR relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 26. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. Section 80IB(10) prior to its substitution by the Finance (No.2), 2004 w.e.f. 01.04.2005 as amended by the Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 01.04.2002 read as under…

ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3193/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…struction vs. ITO, ITA No. 243/Ind/2010, dt. 6.12.2010, ITAT Indore Bench, BCAJ p. 24, Vol. 42-B, Part 5, February 2011. (Trib.) • RNS Infrastructure Ltd. v. Dy. CIT: [2012] 54 SOT 94 (Bangalore -Trib.) • Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture [TS-590-ITAT-2013(PUN)]/159 TTJ 390 25. Ld. DR relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 26. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. Section 80IB(10) prior to its substitution by the Finance (No.2), 2004 w.e.f. 01.04.2005 as amended by the Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 01.04.2002 read as under…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SWATANTRA LAND AND FINANCE PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 568/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Anima Banwal, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 80I

…he entire project. Consequently, it was held, that assessee was entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s 80IB (10(c) of the Act in respect of each of the blocks. The Pune Bench of the ITAT has held in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 390 that construction of even one building with several residential projects of the prescribed size would constitute a housing project for the purpose of section 80IB(10) of the Act. The Pune Bench further held that each block in a particular project has to be taken as an independent building and hence is to be considered a housing project for the…

SWATANTRA LAND & FINANCE PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 143/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Anima Banwal, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 80I

…he entire project. Consequently, it was held, that assessee was entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s 80IB (10(c) of the Act in respect of each of the blocks. The Pune Bench of the ITAT has held in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 390 that construction of even one building with several residential projects of the prescribed size would constitute a housing project for the purpose of section 80IB(10) of the Act. The Pune Bench further held that each block in a particular project has to be taken as an independent building and hence is to be considered a housing project for the…

M/S. SHIPRA ESTATE LTD. & JAI KRISHAN ESTATE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 5849/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2009-10 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Vidharthi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…he entire project. Consequently, it was held, that assessee was entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s 80IB (10(c) of the Act in respect of each of the blocks. The Pune Bench of the ITAT has held in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 390 that construction of even one building with several residential projects of the prescribed size would constitute a housing project for the purpose of section 80IB(10) of the Act. The Pune Bench further held that each block in a particular project has to be taken as an independent building and hence is to be considered a housing project for the…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SHIPRA ESTATE LTD., & JAI KRISHNA ESTATE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 5614/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2009-10 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Vidharthi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…he entire project. Consequently, it was held, that assessee was entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s 80IB (10(c) of the Act in respect of each of the blocks. The Pune Bench of the ITAT has held in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 390 that construction of even one building with several residential projects of the prescribed size would constitute a housing project for the purpose of section 80IB(10) of the Act. The Pune Bench further held that each block in a particular project has to be taken as an independent building and hence is to be considered a housing project for the…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHIPRA ESTATE LTD. & JAI KRISHAN ESTATE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 1950/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2009-10 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Vidharthi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…he entire project. Consequently, it was held, that assessee was entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s 80IB (10(c) of the Act in respect of each of the blocks. The Pune Bench of the ITAT has held in the case of Siddhivinayak Kohinoor Venture vs ACIT (2014) 159 TTJ 390 that construction of even one building with several residential projects of the prescribed size would constitute a housing project for the purpose of section 80IB(10) of the Act. The Pune Bench further held that each block in a particular project has to be taken as an independent building and hence is to be considered a housing project for the…