Smt. Manju Gupta v. ACIT

I.T.O. WD.3(2), Thane vs. S.B. Developers, Thane

…of material and erection of boundary wall, that the expenses were incurred after 01.04.2004,that the FAA decided the issue in favour of the assessee while deciding the appeals for the AY.s.2008-09 and 2009-10.He referred to the matter of Nirmiti Construction(4 SOT 383). 8605/10;2857&2858/M/12;C.O.146/12 & 90/13-SB Developers 13.We find that the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and in the subsequent AY.s.the AO himself has not disallowed the deduction in that regard.In our opinion,expenditure incurred by an assessee for developing the housing project was an integral part of the project a…

ACIT Cir 3, Thane vs. S.B. Developers, Thane

…of material and erection of boundary wall, that the expenses were incurred after 01.04.2004,that the FAA decided the issue in favour of the assessee while deciding the appeals for the AY.s.2008-09 and 2009-10.He referred to the matter of Nirmiti Construction(4 SOT 383). 8605/10;2857&2858/M/12;C.O.146/12 & 90/13-SB Developers 13.We find that the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and in the subsequent AY.s.the AO himself has not disallowed the deduction in that regard.In our opinion,expenditure incurred by an assessee for developing the housing project was an integral part of the project a…

Kamala Brothers, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(2)1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and assessee’s appeal as well as and CO filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2003-04 Kamala Brothers, Ito 24(2)(1) Kuber Chamber, Cts बनाम/ C-13 Bandra Kurla 141-A, Next To Cod, Complex, Bandra(E) Vs. Dutt Mandir Road, Mumbai Malad (E) Mumbai -400097 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaafk0111D Assessment Year: 2003-04 Ito 24(2)(1) Kamala Brothers, C-13 Bandra Kurla Kuber Chamber, Cts 141- बनाम/ Complex, Bandra(E) A, Next To Cod, Dutt Vs. Mumbai Mandir Road, Malad (E) Mumbai -400097 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaafk0111D C.O. No.180/Mum/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1334/Mum/2011) Assessment Year: 2003-04

…findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) are in accordance with law and facts on this issue. Our view finds support from the decisions of the 21 Kamala Brothers Tribunal in the case of Smt. Manju Gupta vs. ACIT 134 ITD 503 (Mum) and Nirmiti Constructions v. DCIT 4 SOT 383 (Pune). 16.4. Other objection of the Ld. AO was that housing project was constructed on plot of land admeasuring 3,200 sq. meters, and thus, not meeting the stipulated minimum areas of one acre as prescribed u/s 80-IB(10)(b) of the Act. It is noted by us that Ld. CIT(A) has met this objection of the AO on the basis of findings recorded by him in h…

Kamala Brothers, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 24(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and assessee’s appeal as well as and CO filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2003-04 Kamala Brothers, Ito 24(2)(1) Kuber Chamber, Cts बनाम/ C-13 Bandra Kurla 141-A, Next To Cod, Complex, Bandra(E) Vs. Dutt Mandir Road, Mumbai Malad (E) Mumbai -400097 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaafk0111D Assessment Year: 2003-04 Ito 24(2)(1) Kamala Brothers, C-13 Bandra Kurla Kuber Chamber, Cts 141- बनाम/ Complex, Bandra(E) A, Next To Cod, Dutt Vs. Mumbai Mandir Road, Malad (E) Mumbai -400097 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaafk0111D C.O. No.180/Mum/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1334/Mum/2011) Assessment Year: 2003-04

…findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) are in accordance with law and facts on this issue. Our view finds support from the decisions of the 21 Kamala Brothers Tribunal in the case of Smt. Manju Gupta vs. ACIT 134 ITD 503 (Mum) and Nirmiti Constructions v. DCIT 4 SOT 383 (Pune). 16.4. Other objection of the Ld. AO was that housing project was constructed on plot of land admeasuring 3,200 sq. meters, and thus, not meeting the stipulated minimum areas of one acre as prescribed u/s 80-IB(10)(b) of the Act. It is noted by us that Ld. CIT(A) has met this objection of the AO on the basis of findings recorded by him in h…

Kamala Brothers, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and assessee’s appeal as well as and CO filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2003-04 Kamala Brothers, Ito 24(2)(1) Kuber Chamber, Cts बनाम/ C-13 Bandra Kurla 141-A, Next To Cod, Complex, Bandra(E) Vs. Dutt Mandir Road, Mumbai Malad (E) Mumbai -400097 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaafk0111D Assessment Year: 2003-04 Ito 24(2)(1) Kamala Brothers, C-13 Bandra Kurla Kuber Chamber, Cts 141- बनाम/ Complex, Bandra(E) A, Next To Cod, Dutt Vs. Mumbai Mandir Road, Malad (E) Mumbai -400097 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaafk0111D C.O. No.180/Mum/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1334/Mum/2011) Assessment Year: 2003-04

…findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) are in accordance with law and facts on this issue. Our view finds support from the decisions of the 21 Kamala Brothers Tribunal in the case of Smt. Manju Gupta vs. ACIT 134 ITD 503 (Mum) and Nirmiti Constructions v. DCIT 4 SOT 383 (Pune). 16.4. Other objection of the Ld. AO was that housing project was constructed on plot of land admeasuring 3,200 sq. meters, and thus, not meeting the stipulated minimum areas of one acre as prescribed u/s 80-IB(10)(b) of the Act. It is noted by us that Ld. CIT(A) has met this objection of the AO on the basis of findings recorded by him in h…