Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. On a careful perusal of the order of Ld.CIT(A), we do not see any infirmity in allowing the claim of the assessee as the claim of the assessee is in tune with the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Lokandwala Construction (supra) wherein it has been held that when the project constructed by the assessee is its stock in trade and not a fixed asset of the assessee the interest paid on loans obtained for stock in trade is an allowable deduction u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act. We also find that in the proceedings before the settlement commission the assessee claimed interest expenses and as per the order dated 28.07.2014 of the settlement commission and during verification proceedings u/s. 245D(3) of I.T. Act, the assessee informed the Assessing Officer that interest of ₹.124.02 crores as claimed in the computation of income on ground of interest expenses retained in inventory is deductible under provisions of ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. It was further informed that the said amount of interest paid was in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of business or profession. It was further submitted that the construction and development having commenced, the business is in operation, therefore, interest is allowable u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act. It was also further brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer that in the case of CIT v. Lokandwala constructions Industries Ltd., [131 Taxman 810] the assessee's claim for deduction of interest, although the revenue was recognized only on project completion basis in subsequent year, was allowed in the year in which the claim of interest was made. Thus, it was contended that the interest expenditure incurred during the year is claimed and allowable as expenses even though the same has been inventorised in the Books of Accounts. These contentions were accepted by the revenue and no objection has been raised by the Assessing Officer and the settlement commission has accepted these contentions of the assessee. This fact was also taken note by the Ld.CIT(A) in allowing the claim of the assessee. Therefore, since the revenue could not controvert the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) that the project constructed by the assessee for which the loans have been taken is not a stock in trade and also the other findings of the Ld.CIT(A), we do not find any valid reason to interfere with ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and accordingly we sustain the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue. Grounds raised by the revenue are rejected.

15. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2016 and the Assessing Officer determined the income of the assessee at ₹.306,02,55,260/- under the normal provisions of the Act and book profits at ₹.291,18,35,338/-. While completing the assessment the ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} Assessing Officer ignored the revised return of income filed by the assessee on the ground that assessee has not filed its original return within time prescribed as per the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. The submission of the assessee that due to technical error in uploading the return on the last date because of which the return got uploaded just after midnight with a delay of two minutes but for that the delay of filing is not intentional, has been rejected by the Assessing Officer observing that as per the provisions of Act the delay cannot be condoned. With these observations the Assessing Officer did not take cognizance of the revised return filed and the total income was assessed as per the original return filed for the purpose of computation of income for the year under consideration. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made computation of income determining the total income at ₹.306,02,55,260/-. While arriving at this total income the Assessing Officer also considered ₹.4,05,74,337/- which are the suomoto additions/disallowance made by the assessee in its revised return of income, even though the revised return was ignored. This amount of ₹.4,05,74,337/- represents reduction in depreciation as per I.T. Act, disallowance u/s. 43C, interest on disallowed payments of TDS, interest on income tax. Apart from this the Assessing Officer made disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act at ₹.89,11,71,622/-, disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act at ₹.80,75,718/-, disallowance of ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} business promotion expenses at ₹.2,21,81,610/- and the claim for deduction u/s. 80IB(10) has been denied completely.

31. On the other hand, Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.

32. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. On a perusal of the order of the Assessing Officer, we find that in the course of the assessment proceedings the assessee was asked to submit detailed working of claim for deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act. The Assessing Officer observed that in the computation submitted by the assessee, assessee has made a claim for deduction of ₹.8,12,78,583/- and whereas in the report submitted under 10CCB the profits eligible for the claim for deduction has been claimed at ₹.7,32,04,923/-. The assessee explained that the claim was made at ₹.8,12,78,583/- inadvertently as this figure was appeared only in the draft ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} computation instead of ₹.7,32,04,923/-. Considering the submissions of the assessee the Assessing Officer computed the excess claim of deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act at ₹.80,73,660/- at Para No. 8 of the assessment order. Further, the Assessing Officer noticed that assessee offered income of ₹.38,18,880/- towards cancellation charges of the apartments in its two projects namely Casabella Gold & Casa Rio. He also noticed that deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act was claimed on these cancellation charges by the assessee. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the said receipts should be considered as profits not eligible for deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act, to which assessee has replied that the said income is directly relating to its eligible projects. Not convinced with the submissions of the assessee the Assessing Officer placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd and CIT v. Sterling Foods [104 Taxman 204] treated these charges received on cancellation of flats as miscellaneous income and denied deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act observing that these charges cannot be said to be having direct nexus with the development of housing projects since it is neither part of the cost nor part of the sale receipts. He also observed that once the flat booking is cancelled the said flat is open for sale to some other buyer and sale receipts in respect of that flat would be accounted separately. Thus, the Assessing Officer ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} restricted the claim for deduction allowable u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act to ₹.6,93,86,043/- by reducing the excess claim of ₹.80,73,660/- which is due to inadvertence of the assessee as admitted and also the cancellation Charges of ₹.38,18,880/- from the total claim made at ₹.8,12,78,353/-. In effect the Assessing Officer allowed the claim for deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act by restricting the same to ₹.6,93,86,043/-. However, this was not allowed as deduction while computing the income as the original return was not filed within time. Since, we have directed the Assessing Officer to consider the original return filed with a delay of two minutes due to technical glitch as the return filed in time, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction as quantified by him in the Assessment Order at ₹.6,93,86,043/. Thus, Ground No.2(a) is allowed.

38. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to ₹.2,04,51,610/- as the assessee could produce details to the tune of ₹.17,30,000/- out of the total expenses of ₹.2,21,81,610/- claim.

39. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is in the business of development of real estate projects in and around Mumbai. During the year under consideration, the real estate market was facing slow down and booking sale at an early stage of construction was very challenging. To surpass such situations, the Real Estate Developers were devising various schemes to lure customers and sell flats/apartments at early stage of construction. Considering the festival scheme which competitors were offering to attract customers the management of the assessee Company also decided to come out with the festive offer in the month of May 2013 to make its products competitive. The management of assessee Company came out with a Gold Festive Scheme for projects which assessee was undertaking on 'Akshaya Trithiya festival' whereby they decided to gift gold coins/gold certificates on booking of flats/apartments during the offer period. For this purpose, the assessee had purchased gold and incurred an amount of ₹.2.21 ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} crores. In view of the fact that this is legitimate business promotion expenditure the same was claimed as deductible while computing taxable income for the AY 2014-15. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee had furnished invoices in relation to purchase of the said gold coins and gold certificates. The learned Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure amounting to ₹.2.21 crores in relation to purchase of gold while completing assessment. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further referring to Page Nos. 58 to 65 of the Paper Book submitted that assessee had made advertisement for gold festival scheme to attract customers. Further, the management had prepared one internal presentation to lay down plan how this scheme will run and what all offers should be made to the customers and the copy of advertisement broacher and internal presentation were placed in Paper Book. It is further submitted that the expenses were incurred for marketing and exhibition of various projects of the assessee overseas and as a result of their marketing efforts, the assessee has been able to sell around 70 flats to various overseas customers. It is further submitted that as a result of the festival offer marketing drive, the assessee was able to book higher sales of units/flats in the projects which were under construction. Therefore, it is submitted that the expenses incurred on gifts to customers is wholly and exclusively ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} for the purpose of business of the assessee and the same is allowable deduction.