Case Law Details
Ravindra Champalal Khinvasara Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)
It is an admitted position that the assessee is otherwise eligible for deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of one of its projects, namely, ‘Khinvasara Fort’. The AO did not dispute the otherwise allowability of deduction of income from the ‘Khinvasara Fort’ project, but observed that the assessee could not furnish any evidence as to the nature of ‘extra work’ on which the deduction was also claimed. Similar position remained before the ld. CIT(A) as well that the assessee could lead no evidence to demonstrate the nature of extra work. Here, it is relevant to note that section 80IB(10) provides deduction at 100% of profit derived from the housing project which fulfils the requisite conditions. It is only the profit from the eligible project which qualifies for deduction. If the developer also undertakes certain other works unconnected with development of project and charges separately from customers, that income cannot qualify for the deduction. Thus, the examination of nature of work done and the resultant income becomes sine qua non for granting or not granting of deduction u/s.80IB(10). Here is a case in which the AO did not dispute the otherwise eligibility of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) on the ‘Khinvasara Fort’. The assessee himself carved out a separate figure of `extra work’ done worth Rs.2.99 lakh on which deduction was claimed. However, he failed to show the nature of ‘extra work’ done for examination by the AO as to whether that also qualified for the deduction. Similar position prevailed before the ld. CIT(A) as well inasmuch as the assessee could not state the nature of `extra work’. There is no change in the factual scenario before the Tribunal as well on this score. In view of the fact that the assessee failed to lead any evidence whatsoever to show the nature of extra work done, the action taken by the authorities below cannot be taken exception to. I, therefore, uphold the impugned order on this issue.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-12, Pune on 31-08-2020 in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.
2. The ld. AR did not press Ground No.2 relating to the addition of Rs.68,950/- towards agricultural income, which is hereby dismissed as ‘not pressed’.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
