The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-17,Mumbai v. M/S Vasupujya Corporation

1itxa-1674-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1674 OF 2011. The Commissioner of Income-Tax-17,Mumbai. .. Appellant. Vs M/s Vasupujya Corporation ...Respondent. Mr D. K. Kamwal, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr Sameer Dalal, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM :- J.P.DEVADHAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJDATED :- 28[th] March, 2012. P. C. :- 1. The following questions of law are raised in this appeal, which read thus:- 2itxa-1674-11 (i) Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in directing the AO to verify the relevant facts and calculation and decide the issue in the light of the decisions of the Tribunal in the cases of Brahma Associates vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income-tax (OSD, Circle-4, Pune (2009) 119 ITD 255 (Pune) (SB) and Vandana Properties vs. ACIT, Circle 25(2), Mumbai (2990) 31 SOT 392 (Mum) without considering the fact that the ratio of judgment in the Vandana Properties vs. ACIT is squarely applicable in the instant case? (ii) Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in not appreciating the fact that the assessee has not fulfilled the conditions laid down under section 80IB(10) in as much as (a) The construction of Rose & Lotus buildings were started in the year 1996-97 as per the plan sanctioned by Pune Municipal Corporation on 4.11.1996 and for Lily, Violet and Row houses it was started as per plan sanctioned on 17.10.98; (b) As per concept of housing project each building is treated as separate project and the assessee has treated the construction of three buildings together for the purpose of 3itxa-1674-11 claiming deduction under section 80 IB (10); and (c) These three buildings are separate and distinct having no connection with each other. If any one of these three buildings is considered as a project, then it does not fulfill the conditions laid down u/s 80 IB, as the area of the building Rose is 2068.5 sq.mtrs. and that of Lotus 2068.5 sq.mtrs and row houses 568.69 sq.mtrs? 2.Counsel for the parties submit that similar questions raised by the Revenue in the case of CIT vs. Vandana Properties being Income-tax Appeal No.3633 of 2009 have been decided by this Court in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue today i.e. on 28[th] March, 2012. 3.For the reasons stated therein, the present appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.R.JOSHI,J) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J)