Commissioner Of Income Taxtrichy v. M/S.harihar Dwelling Pvt. Ltd.,No.b-101, Harihar Residency

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08.07.2015 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKARandTHE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.VIMALA Tax Case (Appeal) No.305 of 2015 Commissioner of Income TaxTrichy. ...Appellant versus M/s.Harihar Dwelling Pvt. Ltd.,No.B-101, Harihar Residency,No.20 Mannarpuram Main Road,Trichy - 20. ...Respondent PRAYER: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 as against the order dated 31.10.2014 made inI..T.A..No.1275/Mds/2012 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2008-2009, againstthe order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) No.44, Williams RoadContonment, Trichirapalli, dated 21.03.2012 made in ITA No. 366/2010-2011, and against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle - I, Trichirapalli, dated : 24.12.2010 made in PAN/GIRNo. . For appellant : Mr.J.NarayanasamyStanding Counsel for Income Tax J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUDHAKAR,J.) This Tax Case (Appeal) is filed by the Revenue as against theorder of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in recalling the orderpassed on merits and re-considering the issues on meritsand allowing the assessees appeal holding that theassessee is entitled for deduction under Section 80IB(10)when the Tribunal had earlier considered the assesseesappeal on merits and had remitted the case back to the CIT(A)?" (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the tribunal was right in holding that theassessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IB(10)by merely following the decision when no material evidencewas submitted by the assessee to substantiate complianceof conditions stipulated under section 80(IB)10)?" 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The assessee is in the business of flat promotion. For theassessment year in question, the assessee claimed deduction underSection 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officerdisallowed the exemption on the ground that the assessee had notfully satisfied the conditions required for claiming deduction underSection 80IB(10). Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed anappeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who allowedthe appeal following the decision of the Tribunal (Calcutta Bench)and directed the Assessing Officer to allow exemption under Section80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenuepreferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, originally,allowed the appeal ex parte holding that the completion certificatewas not obtained from the local authority. Thereafter, on a petitionfiled by the assessee to recall the exparte order, the Tribunalrecalled the order. Thereafter, the Tribunal re-heard the appeal onmerits and following the decision of this Court in the case ofSangvi & Doshi held that the assessee was entitled to claim deductionunder Section 80IB(10). As against the said order of the Tribunal,the Revenue is before this Court. 3. Heard learned Standing counsel appearing for the Revenue andperused the materials placed before this Court. 4. The grievance of the Revenue is that the Tribunal havingremanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer, ought not to havereviewed its own order, which was passed earlier on merits. We findthat the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunalhave given a specific finding that the building in question satisfiesthe requirement under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. 3. Heard learned Standing counsel appearing for the Revenue andperused the materials placed before this Court. 4. The grievance of the Revenue is that the Tribunal havingremanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer, ought not to havereviewed its own order, which was passed earlier on merits. We findthat the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunalhave given a specific finding that the building in question satisfiesthe requirement under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. 5. It is seen that the issue whether the assessee is entitledto deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act has alreadybeen decided by this Court in T.C.(A)Nos.1014 of 2009, 857 of 2010and 190 to 192 of 2012 and W.A.No.471 of 2010 dated 02.11.2012reported in [2013] 29 taxmann.com 19(Madras) in favour of theassessee and against the Revenue holding that the assessee isentitled to the claim of deduction but to the extent of each of theblocks satisfying the conditions under Section 80-IB(10) on aproportionate basis. 6. Since the issue has now been settled by this Court, we findno ground to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, this Tax Case(Appeal) stands dismissed. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)//True Copy//Sub Assistant RegistrarslTo1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras 'C' Bench.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle I,Trichy. 1 CC to Mr.J.Narayananswamy, Advocate SR.No. 34542Tax Case (Appeal) No.305 of 2015EV (CO)PSI (21.08.2015)