Income Tax : Explore recent Supreme Court rulings (2023) on income tax issues. Highlights of key cases, analysis, and implications....
CA, CS, CMA : Discover the major changes in ITR forms for FY 2023-24 (AY 2024-2025). Highlights include new sections for retirement benefit acco...
Income Tax : Tax planning while setting up of a business with reference to location (2021-2022 A.Y, A.Y 2022-2023 , A.Y 2023-2024 and A.Y 202...
Income Tax : Recently, I was approached by a Builder Group seeking a number of clarifications, in respect of the incentive granted U/S 80-IB(10...
Income Tax : Whether nearby cities which are in 25 km from municipality are to be considered at par with metro cities for FY 2016-17? Solution:...
Income Tax : The office of the Comptroller & Auditor General (C & AG) conducts compliance as well as performance audit relating to specific are...
Income Tax : The CBDT did not have any established mechanism to assess the impact of revenue foregone on account of deduction under section 80 ...
Income Tax : Industry chamber Assocham today asked the government to re-introduce the tax exemption scheme to promote affordable housing in the...
Income Tax : Section 80-IB (10) of the Act is aimed at promoting construction of housing projects, so as to address the problem of shortage of ...
Income Tax : Sushanto Roy, CEO, Sahara Prime City, has in a pre-Budget wish list of expectations said: "Given the pent-up demand for affordable...
Income Tax : Deduction under section 80IA(4) couldn't be denied solely due to the delayed filing of Form 10CCB, as the audit report was filed b...
Income Tax : Assessee had given reasons that as per the previous counsel, late Shri R.R. Jain (C.A.) had given advice no separate appeal agains...
Income Tax : The stand of the assessee was that it was not necessary that loss of one industrial undertaking should necessarily be adjusted aga...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act rightly deleted as delay i...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that duty drawback is part of gross receipts for the purpose of calculation of ‘gross receipts’ under the pr...
Income Tax : It is a settled position that revenue subsidies received from the Government towards reimbursement of cost of production/manufactu...
Income Tax : Notification No. 2/2011 - Income Tax In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Rev...
Income Tax : Notification No. 01/2011- Income Tax In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (10) of section 80-...
Income Tax : Notification No. 67/2010 - Income Tax In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Clause (a) and (b) of sub-section (10)...
Income Tax : Instruction No. 4/2009, dated 30-6-2009 Under sub-section (10) of section 80-IB an undertaking developing and building housing pro...
The facts of the present case are similar only in the case in I.T.A. No.350/Del/.2009 wherein the Hon’ble Delhi Bench ‘D’ has dealt with the similar issue which was at ground No.3 of the appeal. The Tribunal has held in favour of the assessee and had remitted back file to the office of Assessing Officer for consideration of claim of assessee u/s 80IB. While deciding the matter, the Hon’ble Tribunal had considered various judicial pronouncements in which it was held that the authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. If an assessee under a mistake, misconception or not being properly instructed is over-assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes are collected.
Assessee owned only 38 guntas of land when he started the construction, he acquired an extent of 1,440 sq. ft. of land adjoining the said land, thus making the total land in which the project was put up, to 44,470 sq.ft. more than 43,480 sq.ft. which is prescribed under the law. The modified housing project was approved in the year 2001 after the aforesaid provision was inserted. On 20.5.2003 occupancy certificate is issued. Therefore, the construction is within the 4 years period stipulated.
One has to examine the stages through which the mash feed is converted into pellet feed. In deciding the issue whether there had been any manufacture of pellet feed. It was to be held that there had been only processing while the production of pellet feed was done by following various stages, namely, (i) batch weighing, (ii) grinding, (iii) mixing, (iv) conditioning with steam, (v) pelleting, (vi) cooling, (vii) crumbling and, finally (viii) packing. The difference between the pellet feed and mash feed, is difference in the quality of the feed and did not throw any light on the manufacture and is of no significance while discussing whether there is manufacture for the purpose of claiming deduction under section 80-IB.
The stand of the revenue with regard to semi-finished condition of the flat is devoid of merit in as much as what is sought to be constructed and sold by the assessee is a residential unit and what is sought to be purchased by the individual buyer is the ownership of a residential unit,
For the purposes of Section 80IB (10) it is not the mandate of the Section that the housing project must be on a vacant plot of land having minimum area of one acre and that where a new housing project is constructed on a plot of land having minimum area of one acre but with existing housing projects would qualify for Section 80IB (10) deduction.
CIT v. G.R. Developers Insofar as balconies are concerned, prior to 01.04.2005, the area covered by them has to be excluded in calculating the built-up area. As the housing project was approved on 14.06.2002 and in the said plan, all these balconies are shown and excluding those balconies, the construction put up is admittedly less than 1,500 sq. ft. After 01.04.2005, the authorities cannot add the balcony area to the built up area and deny the benefit to the assessee. Therefore, as the material on record discloses that all the 84 or 83 flats constructed are less than the 1,500 sq. ft., the assessee cannot be denied the benefit and taxed on the ground that it exceeds 1,500 sq. ft. Hence this question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
Keeping in mind the fact that obstacles were put in assessees getting the benefit, the Legislature introduced the definition of built-up area in sub-section (14)(a) of section 80-IB. From a reading of the definition of built-up area, the intention is clear. In calculating the built-up area it is only the inner measurements of the residential unit on the floor level, which has to be taken into consideration. If there are any projections and balconies and if it exclusively belongs to the residential units, then that also has to be taken into consideration for deciding the built-up area.
ITO Vs. Hindustan Oil Exploration Co. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)- Definition given in Explanation to sec. 42, section 293A as well as in various clauses of Production Sharing Contract it does not require to undergo any process of any physical or composition change but after the process of separation of gas, water and other sedimentary elements become commercial commodity. Therefore, commercial production of mineral oil as per sec. 80IB (9) involves the activity of extracting oil from underneath of surface and transport it for sale and nothing else.
Praveen Soni vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Delhi HC) – On the above issue, the Delhi High Court held that the provisions of section 80-IB nowhere stipulated a condition that the claim for deduction under this section had to be made from the first year of qualification of deduction failing which the claim will not be allowed in the remaining years of eligibility. Therefore, the deduction under section 80-IB should be allowed to the assessee for the remaining years up to the period for which his entitlement would accrue, provided the conditions mentioned under section 80-IB are fulfilled.
CIT v. Chiranjjeevi Wind Energy Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 192 (Madras High Court)- The Supreme Court, in India Cine Agencies v. CIT(2009) 308 ITR 98, laid down that the test to determine whether a particular activity amounts to “manufacture” or not is whether new and different goods emerge having distinctive name, use and character. Further, the Supreme Court, in CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd. (2004) 271 ITR 331, observed that the word “production” or “produce” when used in comparison with the word “manufacture” means bringing into existence new goods by a process, which may or may not amount to manufacture. It also takes in all the by-products, intermediate products and residual products, which emerge in the course of manufacture of goods.
