Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd on 14 November, 2014
Bench: R.Sudhakar, R.Karuppiah
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 14.11.2014 Coram The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR and The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE R.KARUPPIAH Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.769 & 770 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. .... Appellant in both T.C.(A)s Vs. M/s.Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd., 21, II Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. .... Respondent in both T.C.(A)s APPEALs under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act against the order dated 18.04.2013 made in I.T.A.Nos.2033&2034/Mds/2012 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-2010. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Standing Counsel for Income Tax For Respondent : S.Sridhar --------- C O M M O N J U D G M E N T
(Delivered by R.SUDHAKAR,J.) The above Tax Case (Appeals) filed by the Revenue as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal were admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law:
"1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Triubunal was right in holding that the assessee is not a 'works contractor' and is therefore not covered by the explanation under Section 80IB(10)/
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing the benefit of claim under Section 80IB(10) when the assessee is not a developer but only a builder, when the eligibility to deduction under Section 80IB(10) is conferred for developing and building housing projects?"
2. The assessment in the above cases relate to the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-2010.
3. The issue involved in the above Tax Case (Appeals) that whether the assessee is entitled for deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act has already been decided by this Court in T.C.(A)Nos.581 & 582 of 2011 and 314 & 315 of 2012 dated 01.11.2012 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue holding that for the purpose of considering the deduction, it is not necessary that the assessee, engaged in developing and construction of housing project, should be the owner of the property.
4. Hence, following the above-said decision of this Court, the above Tax Case (Appeals) are dismissed and the order of the Tribunal stands confirmed. No costs.
Index :Yes/No (R.S.,J) (R.K.,J) Internet:Yes/No 14.11.2014
sl
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "D" Bench, Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Chennai - 34.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle - V(1),
Chennai.
R.SUDHAKAR,J.
AND
R.KARUPPIAH,J.
sl
T.C.(A) Nos.769 & 770 of 2013
14.11.2014