Itxa/1391/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax -23, Mumbai v. Sonasha Enterpries

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1391 OF 2012 ….… Commissioner of Income Tax-23v/s.Sonasha Enterprises ...Appellant ...Respondent Mr.Arvind Pinto for the Appellant.Mr.Ajay R.Singh for the Respondent. ... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 31 OCTOBER 2014 P.C.: In this case, the only argument of the learned Advocate appearing in support of this Appeal is that the Tribunal should not have allowed the Respondent-Assessee's claim. 2. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 8 June 2012 has held that the objection raised by the Assessing Officer that the Respondent will not be entitled to deduction under Section 80IB(10)(d) cannot be sustained. Upon scrutiny of the entire materials including the agreement, it is apparent that the Respondent-Assessee cannot be termed as a mere contractor. He is a developer and claiming rights in the land/immoveable property, that is how he proceeded to execute necessary agreements and appoint agents to carry out the construction. itxa-1391-12.doc 3.In these circumstances, the Tribunal's order, confirming that of the Commissioner, does not raise any substantial question of law. It was not for the Assessing Officer to have sat in judgment over the satisfaction of the statutory Authorities. The documents in that behalf together with recitals were conclusive of the rights of the Assessee. 4.In these circumstances, the Appeal has no merits. It is, accordingly, disposed of. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.)