Case Law Details
Surana Mutha Bhasali Developers Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune)
The doctrine of approbate and reprobate does not allow the Department to blow hot and cold in the same breath, thereby accepting one consequence arising from the statement of the assessee while rejecting the other one. When the assessee made a surrender with the clear backdrop of having received `on money’ and the Revenue accepted the same while including it in the total income, it cannot later on claim that no deduction u/s 80IB(10) can be granted on the same as the assessee failed to prove that the flat bookers gave such on-money. If we accept the view point of the Revenue that source of the income is unexplained and does not pertain to the housing project, then, in the given facts, when there is no positive material other than the assessee’s statement of receiving such an amount as `on money’, then there is no income in the first instance calling for its inclusion in the total income. Once it is agreed to be `on-money’ from the flats-bookings at the time of its inclusion in the total income, a fortiori, such an income, being from sale of flats albeit received as on-money, qualifies for the deduction as well. We, therefore, overturn the impugned order on this score and order to allow deduction u/s 80IB(10) on such amount.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 19.05.2017 in relation to the A.Y. 2010-11.
2. The only issue raised herein is against the denial of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on certain on-money received by the assessee which was also declared as income.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
