Ita/64/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Brigade Enterprises Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020. PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.64/2014 BETWEEN: 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXC.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROADBANGALORE.C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROADBANGALORE. 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXCIRCLE-11(2), RASHTROTHANA BHAVANNRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001..CIRCLE-11(2), RASHTROTHANA BHAVANNRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.. .., APPELLANTS. (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LID.,BRIGADE TOWERS|NO.135, BRIGADE TOWERSBANGALORE-560025. .. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.K. CHYTHANYA, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT,1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30.08.2013 PASSED IN]M.P.NO.42/BANG/2013 IN ITA NO.1356 & 135/7/BANG/2010 FORTHE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 & 2008-09, PRAYING THAT THISHON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: (1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW.STATED ABOVE. (I) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS)PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE MP NO.42/BANG/2013 IN ITA}NO.1356 & 135/7/BANG/2010 DATED 30-08-2013 CONFIRMINGTHE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM|THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME|TAX, CIRCLE-11(2), BANGALORE. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY,ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax|Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matterof the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2008-09.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 20.03.2015 on the following substantialquestions of law:| (I)Whether the Tribunal was right’ indismissing miscellaneous petition filedby the revenue without appreciating the|fact|thattheISSUE|INvVo| veforAssessment Year 2004-05 was whether|certain blocks in the project could be|treated s individual and independent|projects for the purpose of Section|SOIB(10) and the issue involved_ fordismissing miscellaneous petition filedby the revenue without appreciating the|fact|thattheISSUE|INvVo| veforAssessment Year 2004-05 was whether|certain blocks in the project could be|treated s individual and independent|projects for the purpose of Section|SOIB(10) and the issue involved_ for Assessment Year J2O0O7-08 and JOOS8-is whether individual blocks having flats|of more than 1500 sg. feet of built up|area are eligible for deduction under|Section 80IB(10)? (iI)Whether the Tribunal was right’ inNolding that wnenever built up area Is more than 1500 sq. feet, the assessee|would be entitled to deduction only.proportionate to the profits attributable|to the residential units which have @ibuilt up area of less than 1500 sq. feet|and above by violating the provision of|Section 8OIB(10) of the Act?Nolding that wnenever built up area Is more than 1500 sq. feet, the assessee|would be entitled to deduction only.proportionate to the profits attributable|to the residential units which have @ibuilt up area of less than 1500 sq. feet|and above by violating the provision of|Section 8OIB(10) of the Act? |For the reasons assigned by us in the orderpassed today in ITA No.54/2013, the substantialquestions of law are answered against the revenue andin favour of the assessee. �6�:.3�83054: �:.3�122314�<1/40�167�/0�.383?@� 7/0=/0037�� ����������� �����������00�