Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : M/s Aarti Projects and Constructions Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : IT.A. No. 4190/Mum/2016
Date of Judgement/Order : 05.01.2017
Related Assessment Year : 2012-13
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Facts of the Case

Facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in the business of real estate development, construction of building and slum rehabilitation. During the year under consideration, the assessee undertook construction of tenements under Slum Rehabilitation Scheme of the Government of Maharashtra (‘the said Scheme’ in short) so as to enable the State to provide shelters to slum dwellers, for which consideration was paid in the form of FSI. The FSI thus awarded as consideration for the construction activities undertaken under the said Scheme could either be utilized for construction of sale buildings on situ (on the same plot), or sold in open market as such, or in the form of Transferable Development Rights (‘TDR’ in short). During the year under consideration, the assessee had claimed deduction u/s, 80- IB(10) of the act which was arrived at after reducing the cost involved in the construction of rehabilitation buildings from the consideration received for the FSI granted by the State and which was sold to third parties as permitted under the said scheme. However, AO declined assessee’s claim of deduction on the plea that the profit claimed as deduction u/s 80-IB(10) of the Act was not derived from the housing project but from sale of unutilized FSI. For arriving at his conclusion the AO has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (317 ITR 218) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Moon Star Developers (367 ITR 621).

 The AO further observed that since the FSI sold formed part of the project under development, the project could not be said to be completed and, therefore, deduction u/s. 80-IB(10) of the Act was not allowable.

As per AO since the FSI sold to each of the persons mentioned in paragraph 2.1.5 of the assessment order was in excess of 1000 sq. ft there was violation of S. 80-IB(10)(iii)(c) of the Act. It was also observation of AO that the persons to whom FSI was sold were closely related with the assessee and, therefore, it was sold with intention to defraud the revenue, wherein the FSI was sold at very high rates so as to avail excessive deduction u/s.80-IB(10) of the Act.

Held by ITAT

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031