SHIRISH M DALVI,KALYAN vs. DCIT CIR 29(3), MUMBAI

Accordingly, we uphold the finding of Ld CIT(A). The ground No. four of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shirish M. Dalvi, Dcit Circle-23(3), D’ Block, 1St Floor, Zojwala 3Rd Floor, C-10, Pratyaksha Vs. Complex, Sahajanand Kar Bhavan, Bandra East, Chowk, Kalyan-421 301. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadpd 0358 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Circle-23(3), Shirish M. Dalvi, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, C-10 D’ Block, 1St Floor, Zojwala Vs. Bldg., Pratyakshakar Complex, Sahajanand Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Chowk, Kalyan-421 301. Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadpd 0358 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shirish M. Dalvi, Dcit-29(3), D’ Block, 1St Floor, Zojwala Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, C- Vs. Complex, Sahajanand 10, Pratyaksha Kar Chowk, Kalyan-421 301. Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadpd 0358 H

801B(10) that in a case where the approval in respeet of the housing project is obtained more than once. such housing project shall he deemed to have been approved on the date on which the building plan of such housing project is first approved by the local authority. In view of the discussions made carlier and as evident from

BHAVYA CONSTRUCTION CO.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 21(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the assessee's appeals ITA No

housing properties, is\nthat the construction of the project approved before the first\nday of April 2004, should have been completed on or before\nthe 31st day of March 2008. It is noticed that the Slum\nRehabilitation Authority approved assessee's project on\n10.06.1990 vide SRA approval letter at page 56-61 of\nassessee's paper book commencement certificate

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. BOMBAY SLUM REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 801B(10). These matters went up to Hon'ble Tribunal and in all these ese matters went up to Hon'ble Tribunal and in all these ese matters went up to Hon'ble Tribunal and in all these Bombay Slum Redevelopment Bombay Slum Redevelopment 8 Corporation Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 6126/MUM/2025 years, Hon'ble ITAT has upheld the claim

ACIT-24(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S.ATUL PROPERTIES, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4393 & 4394/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years:2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-24(1) बिधम/ M/S. Atul Properties Room No.604, Piramal 501-502, Trade Avenue, Off Vs. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Suren Road, Western Express Mumbai-400012. Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamfa3756F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Damor (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Jain/Mahaveer Jain & Ms. Carmi Shroff सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/05/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-36, Mumbai Dated 29.12.2017 For A.Y.2010-11 & 2011- 12 Respectively.

Properties 2002-03 to 2007-08. Assessee was a builder and developer company - it undertook a mega housing project was approved in the year 2000. Assessee completed a part of project and obtained completion certificate for that part of project from Municipal Corporation on 10- 10-2008. Assessee sought exemption under section 80-IB(10). Assessing Officer denied assessee

ACIT-24(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S.ATUL PROPERTIES, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4393 & 4394/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years:2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-24(1) बिधम/ M/S. Atul Properties Room No.604, Piramal 501-502, Trade Avenue, Off Vs. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Suren Road, Western Express Mumbai-400012. Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamfa3756F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Damor (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Jain/Mahaveer Jain & Ms. Carmi Shroff सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/05/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-36, Mumbai Dated 29.12.2017 For A.Y.2010-11 & 2011- 12 Respectively.

Properties 2002-03 to 2007-08. Assessee was a builder and developer company - it undertook a mega housing project was approved in the year 2000. Assessee completed a part of project and obtained completion certificate for that part of project from Municipal Corporation on 10- 10-2008. Assessee sought exemption under section 80-IB(10). Assessing Officer denied assessee

ITO 3(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. OMEGA INVESTMENT & PROPERTIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.868/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Income Tax Officer 3(2) (4) बिधम/ M/S. Omega Investment & Room No. 673,6Th Floor, Properties Ltd Vs. 32-B, Jolly Maker Chambers Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, No.2 Nariman Point, Mumbai- Mumbai- 400020. 400021. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco0978L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Mr. Rakesh Joshi Revenue By: Mr. Asif Karmani, Sr. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

section 801B(10) of the Act where approval in respect of the housing project had been obtained more than once, such project 16 AY 2007-08 M/s Omega Investment and Properties

M/S. AMEYA BUILDERS & PROPERTY DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, THANE

Property Vs Developers At M. Baria Business House, P.P. Marg, Virat Nagar, Virar (West) – 401301 [PAN: AAFFA9223L] ……………. Respondent ITA Nos. 1936-1939/Mum/2022 & ITA No. 2219-2222/Mum/2022 AY 2010-11, AY 2012-13 to 2015-16 Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi For the Respondent/Department : Smt. R.M. Madhavi Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha Date Conclusion of hearing : 10.03.2023 Pronouncement

ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, THANE vs. M/S. AMEYA BUILDERS & PROPERTY DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

Property Vs Developers At M. Baria Business House, P.P. Marg, Virat Nagar, Virar (West) – 401301 [PAN: AAFFA9223L] ……………. Respondent ITA Nos. 1936-1939/Mum/2022 & ITA No. 2219-2222/Mum/2022 AY 2010-11, AY 2012-13 to 2015-16 Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi For the Respondent/Department : Smt. R.M. Madhavi Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha Date Conclusion of hearing : 10.03.2023 Pronouncement

AVINASH S SADAMATE, ACIT, CIRCLE 3 3 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RASHMI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the Revenue's appeal and Cross\nObjection are dismissed

801B(10)\nof the Act against the on-money received on the sale of flats. We find\nthat the assessee has admitted on-money of Rs.11,97,98,708/- from sale\nof residential flats and offered it as business income and has claimed\nthat it is entitled to claim deduction u/s 80-IB(10) on the on-money\nreceived from

MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CENTRAL RANGE-7(3), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

property taxes till handing over possession to clients, infrastructure charges, legal and other charges incurred during construction are integral part of the project and hence, derived from the project to be eligible for deduction under section 801B of the Act. 3) The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal. 3. The relevant facts

KOMAL ENTERPRISES,DOMBIVALI vs. ITO, WARD 3(3), KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarita No.4421/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

section (d) to sec 80IB(10), ignoring the fact that the housing project for which deduction u/s 80IB (10) was claimed by the appellant did not contain any commercial premises and therefore the disallowance on the above ground was not justified. 6. The Hon CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant was not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10

KOMAL ENTERPRISES,DOMBIVALI vs. ITO, WARD 3(3), KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarita No.4421/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

section (d) to sec 80IB(10), ignoring the fact that the housing project for which deduction u/s 80IB (10) was claimed by the appellant did not contain any commercial premises and therefore the disallowance on the above ground was not justified. 6. The Hon CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant was not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10

SAI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,VASHI vs. PCIT-27, VASHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalsaibuildersanddevelopers, Vs Pr.Cit-27, B12,Ashiana,Plotno.15, Roomno.401, Sector17,Vashi, 4Thflr,Towerno.6, Navi Mumbai-400703. Vashi Railway Stationcomplex,Vashi, Navimumbai-400703. Pan/Gir No. : Abbfs0092C Appellant .. Respondent

801B), (iii) Project Yashaskaram and (iv) Project Sumukha. 3The project-wise Profit & Loss A/c. has been submitted by the assessee, the gist of which are as under: Project Op. Stock & GP Sales Closing WIP stock Chaturbhuj 1,06,86,980 40,19,038 51,55,000 95,51,018 Yashwasin 11,55,964 0 0 11,55,964 Yashaskara

AHCL PEL,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC- 3(4), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed while Ground No

10) of the Act on the alleged increased sales revenue of Rs. 2,66,75,360/-.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee is a partnership firm between Ace housing construction Ltd. and Patel Engineering Ltd. (AHCL-PEL). Assessee entered into a joint development agreement with M/s Jivesh Developers & Properties (P.) Ltd. (JDPPL) for development

DY CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S AHCL PEL, MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed while Ground No

10) of the Act on the alleged increased sales revenue of Rs. 2,66,75,360/-.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee is a partnership firm between Ace housing construction Ltd. and Patel Engineering Ltd. (AHCL-PEL). Assessee entered into a joint development agreement with M/s Jivesh Developers & Properties (P.) Ltd. (JDPPL) for development

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED, MUMBAI

House, B.D. Sawant Marg,\nChakala, Off Western Express Highway,\nAndheri (E),\nMumbai - 400099\nPAN: AAACH1004N\nCross Objector\n(Original Respondent)\nv/s\nDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax,\n1(1)(2),\n579, Aayakar Bhavan,\nM.K. Road,\nMumbai - 400020\nRespondent\n(Original Appellant)\nAssessee by : Shri Nishant Thakkar\nMs. Jasmin Amalsadvala\nRevenue by : Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR\nDate of Hearing – 02/12/2025\nDate

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY.CIT-1(1)(2), MUMBAI

House, B.D. Sawant Marg,\nChakala, Off Western Express Highway,\nAndheri (E),\nMumbai - 400099\nPAN: AAACH1004N\nCross Objector\n(Original Respondent)\nv/s\nDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax,\n1(1)(2),\n579, Aayakar Bhavan,\nM.K. Road,\nMumbai - 400020\nRespondent\n(Original Appellant)\nAssessee by : Shri Nishant Thakkar\nMs. Jasmin Amalsadvala\nRevenue by : Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR\nDate of Hearing – 02/12/2025\nDate

EVERSHINE DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Evershine Developers Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 215, Veena Beena Shopping Centre, Central Circle 2(4) Vs. Opp. Bandra Station, Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aabfe 6729 P (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assesseeby : Shrirohit Golecha Respondent By : Ms. Sudha Ramachandran Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2024 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:

section 801B(10) of the Act being write back of sundry creditors pertaining to eligible housing project. The reasons assigned by him for doing the same are wrong and insufficient. 2) The below grounds are without prejudice to each other, 2 Evershine Developers vs. Dy. CIT a) On the facts and circumstances of the case as well