Sri v. Chandrasekhar And M. Lava Advs

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE O8 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2071.PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’‘’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASW A BETWEEN: ILT.A. NO.197 OF 2014 1.|THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2.|THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1). C.R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. (BY SRI.K.V. ARAVIND ADV.,). .., APPELLANTS. AND" M/S VARUN DEVELOPERS# 41, VITTAL MALLYA ROADBANGALORE. ~. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A SHANKAR SENIOR FOR, SRI. V. CHANDRASEKHAR AND M. LAVA ADVS.,) THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX|ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 05.12.2013 PASSED TN|ITANO.373/BANG/2013—FORTHE|ASSESSMENT2007-2008, PRAYING TO:(i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW,STATED ABOVE. YEAR (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE,ORDER|PASSEDBY|THE|LIAT,BANGALORE.IN|LIANO,NO.373/BANG/2013 DATED:05.12.2013 AND CONFIRMING THEORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE.ORDER PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE. THIS ILT.A. COMING ON FOR’ HEARING, THIS DAY, | ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter|of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2007-08.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 20.07.2015 on the following substantial|questions of law:| 7 aWhether on the facts and in the.circumstances of tne case, the Tribunal wascorrect in holding that the assessee is entitledto deduction under section SOIB(10) of the Act.on proportionate basis in respect of the flatsmeasuring less than 1500 square feet, withouttaking into consideration that the benefit under section 8OIB(10) Is in respect of the entire.“housing project’ and not in respect of the.flats/units specific independently? ?D Without prejudice to first questionof law, Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances, the Tribunal was correct inholding that the assessee would be entitled todeduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act in-respect of 12th and 13th floor flats, when the.flats were combined and were measuring more—than 1500 square feet? 3.Whether on the facts and in the.circumstances of the case the Tribunal wasright in holding that the assessee was entitledto deduction of the flats at the 17th and 13thfloor when tne assessee has not claimedbenefit in the return of income filed, withoutrevising the original return of income? A oWhether on the facts and In the.circumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in holding that the income of the.assessee from project “Mantri Sarovar’ has to.be computed for the Assessment year 2006- O7 on the basis of “Project computationmethod” without appreciating that as per AS/|and|AS9,.theadSSCSSCEhas.To followpercentage completion method as the assesseeis a builder and developer? 2.|For the reasons assigned by us in the.judgment passed today in I.T.A.No.198/2014, the|substantial questions of law are answered against the|revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby|dismissed. Sd/-—JUDGE. SS| Sd/-—JUDGE.