Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.26 seconds)Section 80 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Ghodawat Hotels Pvt.Ltd., Jaipur vs Dcit(Hq), Jaipur on 9 February, 2017
In-fact, the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ferani Hotels
Pvt. Ltd. (supra) observed that the Revenue deserves to be satisfied that the
conditions for grant of deduction are fulfilled on the last day of the previous year,
so however, if the subsequent events after the last date of the previous year show
that the conditions for grant of deduction are fulfilled, then the Assessing Officer
ought to take cognizance of the same and allow the claim of the assessee.
Following the aforesaid parity of reasoning, in our view, in the present case too it is
undeniable that assessee has complied with the requirement of locating minimum
of 30 industrial units in the Industrial Park within the period prescribed in the
Scheme, and therefore its claim for assessment year 2007-08 was unjustly
disallowed."
The Finance Act, 2018
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Ras Polybuild Products P. Ltd., Hyd, ... vs Dcit, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad, ... on 8 December, 2016
granted to those eligible undertakings as such. The crucial question to be
examined is whether the eligible undertaking for which the assessee has sought
deduction has been in fact approved and notified. If the answer is yes, the
assessee qualifies the condition laid down in the project scheme. Therefore, it is
not proper on the part of the AO to decline the deduction on the ground that the
assessee has started functioning even before the formal order of approval and
notification. This is not a ground to deny exemption to the assessee."
Nandighosh Estates Pvt. Ltd, Ganjam vs Acit, Berhampur on 16 November, 2016
21. Brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee had developed a
housing project 'Kumar Puram' and claimed deduction under section 80IB(10) of
the Act at Rs.16,13,700/-. The Assessing Officer denied the said claim of
assessee on the ground that where the project was sanctioned in 24.04.1998 and
the construction of the said project had started immediately, but as per the
provisions of section 80IB(10) of the Act, project should have been commenced on
or after 01.10.1998. Another issue raised by the Assessing Offic er was that the
commercial area in the project was more than 5% of the total area of the project.
The third reason for disallowing the deduction was that the assessee had
developed the housing project 'Kumar Puram' and commercial project 'Business
Court' in the same plot and had divided the plot by making sub-plots and hence,
violated the conditions prescribed in the section. These objections were raised in
assessment year 2001-02 and the deduction claimed under section 80IB(10) of
the Act was denied. The Tribunal in M/s. Sukumar Estates Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA
Nos.336/PN/2006, relating to assessment year 2001-02, vide order dated
27 ITA No.690/PUN/2014
ITA No. 843/PUN/2014
Kumar Housing Corporation Ltd.
1