(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Revenue has challenged the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25.5.11 raising following two questions for our consideration :
"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing the A.O. to allow the deduction after verification as to whether the assessee has purchased the land for a fixed consideration from the landowner and has developed the housing project at its own risks and cost involved, in respect of issue regarding deduction u/s.80IB(10) r.w.s. 80IB(1) claimed by the assessee, without appreciating that the approval by the local authority as well as completion certificate was not granted to the assessee but to the landowner and the rights and the obligations under the said approval were not transferable, and when the transfer of dwelling units in favour of the end- users was made by the landowner and not by the assessee?"
HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Wed Jan 24 23:03:45 IST 2018 TAXAP/1464/2011 2/2 ORDER
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing deduction u/s.80IB(10) r.w.s. 80IB(1) to the assessee on profit derived from sale of unutilized FSI, not being the element of profit derived from the business activity of development and construction of the housing project relating to the sale of tenements ?"
Insofar as question No.1 is concerned, counsel for the Revenue candidly pointed out that such question has been concluded by virtue of the decision of this Court dated 13.12.11 in Tax Appeal No.546 of 2008 and connected appeals, in the case of CIT v. Radhe Developers.
Insofar as question No.2 is concerned, counsel argued that the Revenue had raised the question of deduction claimed by the assessee for sale of unused FSI which according to the Revenue would not qualify for deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act. The Tribunal, however, without giving any findings on such ground, merely remanded the proceedings before the A.O. to examine the facts and thereafter to give effect to its judgment in Radhe Developers.
Considering the averments, Tax Appeal is admitted for consideration of question No.2 only.
To be heard with Tax Appeal No.1306 of 2011 and connected appeals.
(Akil Kureshi, J.) (Harsha Devani, J.) (vjn) HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Wed Jan 24 23:03:45 IST 2018