DCIT., (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. SYAMA REDDY MALI REDDY, HYDERABAD

Section 54.\n11. What has been stated in the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High\nCourt in 1997, in practical terms and in reality still holds good. This is a\nmatter of common knowledge that flats or apartments being constructed\nby builders take time. The Government Housing Boards also take time\nand seldom adhere to the promised date. Similar view

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

397 ITR 107 ( Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh HC. In this case, the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court held that not only issue of completion certificate/Occupancy Certificate by the competent Page 11 of 32 ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. authority certifying the completion of the project within the stipulated due date, but also such certificate should have

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

397 ITR 107 ( Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh HC. In this case, the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court held that not only issue of completion certificate/Occupancy Certificate by the competent Page 11 of 32 ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. authority certifying the completion of the project within the stipulated due date, but also such certificate should have

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

397 ITR 107 ( Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh HC. In this case, the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court held that not only issue of completion certificate/Occupancy Certificate by the competent Page 11 of 32 ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. authority certifying the completion of the project within the stipulated due date, but also such certificate should have

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S. Sabir, Sew & The Deputy Commissioner Of Prasad, Jv, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abcfs2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

house property’, the assessee was eligible for claiming deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(iii) of the Act as ‘business income’, for the reason that the assessee was merely engaged in developing and maintaining infrastructural facilities which arose out of a project approved by the Government of India as an eligible project for claiming deduction u/s. 80IA

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

house property', the assessee was eligible for\nclaiming deduction u/s.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act as ‘business income', for the\nreason that the assessee was merely engaged in developing and\nmaintaining infrastructural facilities which arose out of a project\napproved by the Government of India as an eligible project for claiming\ndeduction u/s.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act. Further

SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

house property', the assessee was eligible for\nclaiming deduction u/s.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act as ‘business income', for the\nreason that the assessee was merely engaged in developing and\nmaintaining infrastructural facilities which arose out of a project\napproved by the Government of India as an eligible project for claiming\ndeduction u/s.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act. Further

SABIR, SEW 7 PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

house property', the assessee was eligible for\nclaiming deduction u/s.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act as ‘business income', for the\nreason that the assessee was merely engaged in developing and\nmaintaining infrastructural facilities which arose out of a project\napproved by the Government of India as an eligible project for claiming\ndeduction u/s.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act. Further

UNILOIDS BIO SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(3), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

house property rejecting the claim of the assesse that the same constitute income from business and therefore, the addition ought to have been deleted. 4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have observed that the assessing officer erred in treating the lease rental income of the plant and machinery as income from other sources rejecting the claim

UNILOIDS BIOSCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(3), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

house property rejecting the claim of the assesse that the same constitute income from business and therefore, the addition ought to have been deleted. 4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have observed that the assessing officer erred in treating the lease rental income of the plant and machinery as income from other sources rejecting the claim

DCIT-1, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), HYDERABAD vs. SYAMA REDDY MALIREDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section for claiming the deduction. It was the case of the Revenue that neither the possession nor registration of flat happened in two years from the date of transfer of capital assets and hence, assessee is not entitled for claim u/s 54 of the Act. 8. On the other hand, ld. AR had submitted that the assessee had paid substantial

IMTIAZ FAROOQI,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-1(3) , HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

house property, business and other sources. He is also the proprietor of M/s Infoway Technologies and Managing Director of M/s United Railroad Constructions Private Limited. 3. For the assessment year 2010-11 he filed the return of income on 22/11/2010 and assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) was complete by order

IMTIAZ FAROOQI ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

house property, business and other sources. He is also the proprietor of M/s Infoway Technologies and Managing Director of M/s United Railroad Constructions Private Limited. 3. For the assessment year 2010-11 he filed the return of income on 22/11/2010 and assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) was complete by order

ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), HYDERABAD vs. EMAAR HILLS TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.250/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.424/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) The Assistant Commissioner Emaar Hills Township Of Income Tax, Vs. Private Limited, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.251 To 253/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

Housing Project. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 11.01.2005, the formation of three SPVs and a revised equity structure of Emaar Properties PJSC and APIIC having 74% and 26%, respectively, in all the three SPVs were approved. In terms of above Collaboration Agreement and Government Order, the appellant company was incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Emaar Holding, Mauritius. Thereafter

EMAAR HILLS TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 2(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.250/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.424/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) The Assistant Commissioner Emaar Hills Township Of Income Tax, Vs. Private Limited, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.251 To 253/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

Housing Project. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 11.01.2005, the formation of three SPVs and a revised equity structure of Emaar Properties PJSC and APIIC having 74% and 26%, respectively, in all the three SPVs were approved. In terms of above Collaboration Agreement and Government Order, the appellant company was incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Emaar Holding, Mauritius. Thereafter

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. EMAAR HILLS TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.250/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.424/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) The Assistant Commissioner Emaar Hills Township Of Income Tax, Vs. Private Limited, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.251 To 253/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

Housing Project. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 11.01.2005, the formation of three SPVs and a revised equity structure of Emaar Properties PJSC and APIIC having 74% and 26%, respectively, in all the three SPVs were approved. In terms of above Collaboration Agreement and Government Order, the appellant company was incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Emaar Holding, Mauritius. Thereafter

EMAAR HILLS TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 2(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.250/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.424/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) The Assistant Commissioner Emaar Hills Township Of Income Tax, Vs. Private Limited, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.251 To 253/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

Housing Project. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 11.01.2005, the formation of three SPVs and a revised equity structure of Emaar Properties PJSC and APIIC having 74% and 26%, respectively, in all the three SPVs were approved. In terms of above Collaboration Agreement and Government Order, the appellant company was incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Emaar Holding, Mauritius. Thereafter

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. EMAAR HILLS TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.250/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.424/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) The Assistant Commissioner Emaar Hills Township Of Income Tax, Vs. Private Limited, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.251 To 253/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Emaar Hills Township The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabce2557N. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

Housing Project. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 11.01.2005, the formation of three SPVs and a revised equity structure of Emaar Properties PJSC and APIIC having 74% and 26%, respectively, in all the three SPVs were approved. In terms of above Collaboration Agreement and Government Order, the appellant company was incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of Emaar Holding, Mauritius. Thereafter