Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.79 seconds)
Documents citing The Ito, Ward-2(6),, Baroda vs M/S. Saket Corporation,, Baroda on 1 August, 2017

Dcit, Cir-12(1), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S Bengal Ambuja Housing Development ... on 20 November, 2019

22. The above decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was followed with approval by the same Court in the subsequent decision rendered in the case of ITO Vs Saket Corporation (234 Taxman 435). In the decided case the assessee had completed construction of all 43 units comprised in the housing project within the prescribed period of years. It was however able to obtain permission from the local authority with respect to 20 units and although application was filed in respect of remaining 23 units but permission could not be obtained in relation thereof. The AO disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80IB(10) observing that the necessary completion certificate was not obtained by the assessee from local authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Late Puran Ratilal Mehta Through Its ... vs Acit 23(3), Mumbai on 5 December, 2018

The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of ITO vs Saket Corporation 234 Taxmn.com 435 (Guj) held that when the building is completed in all respects, obtaining OC is not a mandatory requirement in order to ascertain whether the building was completed or not for the purpose of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The 25 Late Puran Ratilal Mehta ITAT, Pune Bench in the case of Runwal Motel Housing Pvt Ltd in ITA No.1015/PN/2011 had considered similar issue in the light of non issue of occupation certificate by municipal authorities and after considering relevant facts, held that when the assessee has handed over possession of the flat to the buyers, merely for non receipt of completion certificate, deduction cannot be denied. The Ld.CIT(A), after apprising all facts, held that the assessee has fulfilled conditions prescribed u/s 80IB(10) in order to be eligible for deduction for eligible profits. We do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and hence, we are inclined to uphold the findings of Ld.CIT(A) and reject ground taken by the revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

The Dcit, Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad vs Parshwanath Corporation,, Ahmedabad on 18 October, 2023

9. Now we shall come to the facts of the PMC Project, wherein the issue for consideration before is this that the BU Permission was obtained in respect of only 349 Units out of a total of 376 Units and therefore, can the assessee be allowed to take benefit of deduction under Section under Section 80(IB)(10) of the Act only with respect to the Units which have been completed, or whether the entire claim of deduction under Section 80(IB)(10) of the Act has to be denied to the assessee with respect to PMC Project. We observe that in the case of ITO vs. Saket Corporation 62 taxmann.com 38, the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee had completed construction of its entire Housing Project and applied for BU Permission / Completion Certificate within prescribed time limit, it would be entitled to deduction under Section 80(IB)(10) notwithstanding the fact the it could not receive permission for its entire project. In the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has given a specific finding that the assessee had obtained BU Permission subsequently for remaining three blocks as well, however, no deduction under Section 80(IB)(10) of the Act was claimed with respect to the aforesaid three blocks. Further, with respect to the claim of proportionate deduction only with respect those Units for which BU permission had been received, the Pune ITAT in the case of M/s. Sai Siddhi Atul in ITA No. 2420/PN/2016 vide order dated 15.11.2018 has made the following important observations:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, Cir-12(1), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S Bengal Ambuja Housing Development ... on 18 October, 2019

22. The above decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was followed with approval by the same Court in the subsequent decision rendered in the case of ITO Vs Saket Corporation (234 Taxman 435). In the decided case the assessee had completed construction of all 43 units comprised in the housing project within the prescribed period of years. It was however able to obtain permission from the local authority with respect to 20 units and although application was filed in respect of remaining 23 units but permission could not be obtained in relation thereof. The AO disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80IB(10) observing that the necessary completion certificate was not obtained by the assessee from local authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Dcit, Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad vs Parshwanath Corporation,, Ahmedabad on 18 October, 2023

9. Now we shall come to the facts of the PMC Project, wherein the issue for consideration before is this that the BU Permission was obtained in respect of only 349 Units out of a total of 376 Units and therefore, can the assessee be allowed to take benefit of deduction under Section under Section 80(IB)(10) of the Act only with respect to the Units which have been completed, or whether the entire claim of deduction under Section 80(IB)(10) of the Act has to be denied to the assessee with respect to PMC Project. We observe that in the case of ITO vs. Saket Corporation 62 taxmann.com 38, the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee had completed construction of its entire Housing Project and applied for BU Permission / Completion Certificate within prescribed time limit, it would be entitled to deduction under Section 80(IB)(10) notwithstanding the fact the it could not receive permission for its entire project. In the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has given a specific finding that the assessee had obtained BU Permission subsequently for remaining three blocks as well, however, no deduction under Section 80(IB)(10) of the Act was claimed with respect to the aforesaid three blocks. Further, with respect to the claim of proportionate deduction only with respect those Units for which BU permission had been received, the Pune ITAT in the case of M/s. Sai Siddhi Atul in ITA No. 2420/PN/2016 vide order dated 15.11.2018 has made the following important observations:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Dcit, B.K. Circle, Palanpur vs Rushay Commodities Pvt. Ltd, ... on 21 March, 2023

In the case of ITO vs. Saket Corporation 62 taxman.com 38 (Gujarat), the assessee claimed deduction u/s. 80IB with respect to housing project consisting of 43 units, it was disallowed on the ground that building use permission and completion certificate was granted only with respect to 20 units within the period of four years from date of approval of project by local authority and the permission was not granted with respect to the entire housing project consisting 43 units. The Gujarat High Court held that since assessee had completed construction of all 43 units and had applied for building use permission/completion certificate within four years from date of approval by competent authority, it was entitled to deduction u/s. 80IB(10) and notwithstanding the fact that building use permission was granted with respect to only 20 units.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs M/S Majestic Developers, Bangalore on 20 October, 2017

(iii) ITO Vs. Saket Corporation in ITA N o.107 of 2015 dt 5/5/2015 3.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record, including the judicial pronouncements cited. The sole issue for adjudication before us is with regard to whether the assessee is eligible for the deduction claimed by it u/s 80-1B of the Act for asst. years 2007-08 and 2008-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1