News Update

Indo-Dutch trade relations all set to get boostCEIB invites applications for DD-level postsCabinet gives nod for cellular service in Naxal districtsOpposition closes ranks; Kumaraswamy sworn in as Karnataka CMIndia, Turkey ink MoU for import of poppy seedsCabinet approves mobile scheme for MeghalayaForeign Exchange Earnings register 10% growth in April, 2018CX - It is settled law that authority conferred with jurisdiction over recipient is not competent to re-determine tax liability suffered on input at supply end: CESTATJourney towards the Trust Based GST RegimeSales Tax - Rendering of voice transmission service does not involve any transfer of equipment or transfer of right to use, to attract salex tax: HCGST on Non-supply of services (See 'JEST GST on GST Home Page')I-T - On receipt of information from VAT Department about bogus purchases if AO observes that 'deep verification' is required, still reassessment proceeding cannot be initiated at this stage: HCGovt notifies Draft Pax Charter Defining RightsST - Appellant and M/s SITV form part of same company and it is only a division of appellant - discharge of service tax liability by M/s SITV on behalf of appellant does not tantamount to discharging service tax liability of another company: CESTATCBDT grants three months to task force on DTCModi, Putin discuss international issues'Nipah Virus': Centre ensures availability of diagnostic kits in KeralaMP generates 3900 MW of renewable energyI-T - Major relief for DPS; Transport facility provided by schools to their students only, are incidental to educational activity, and hence exempted: ITATI-T - Stock discrepancy in books of account can lead to subsequent addition based on Gross Profit: HCI-T - Compensation paid to retrenched workers on closure of manufacturing unit is allowable business expenditure u/s 37: ITATI-T - Abnormally high LTCG in short span of time without expert advice, from unlisted company's share whose even net worth is not known to assessee, is beyond business logics and is a valid reason to make addition u/s 68: ITATNipah Virus spreading in Kerala - Central team dispatchedTreading GST Path - XLIV - Understanding Anti-profiteeringCX - CENVAT - Merely routing billing transaction through appellant will not make appellant as recipient of C&F service: CESTATTax on Ocean Freight -A long legislative haulACC approves senior level appointmentsST - Whether ticket is bought directly from airline or through General Sales Agent (GSA), same would not make any difference - classifying services under BAS and demanding tax is not sustainable: CESTATCX - Valuation -S.4 of CEA, 1944 - Price prevailing for sale at depot immediately 'prior' to clearance from factory gate was to be adopted: CESTATThe new AEO Scheme
 
I-T - Development of housing project does not qualify for full deduction u/s 80IB(10), where utilization of FSI is way short of permissible area of construction & assessee has not made any special ground for under utilization of FSI : HC

By TIOL News Service

AHMEDABAD, MAY 15, 2018: THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT is - Whether development of a housing project qualifies for full deduction u/s 80IB(10), where the utilization of FSI is way short of the permissible area of construction & assessee has not made any special ground for under utilization of the FSI. And the answer is NO.

Facts of the case:

The assessee partnership firm engaged in the development of housing project, had filed its return for the relevant AY and claimed deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act . Subsequently the AO took return in to security and observed that the assessee had developed three housing projects and had utilized about 20% or less of the permissible Floor Space Index (FSI) for construction. The AO further observed that substantial portion of assessee's profits was not derived from development of housing project but through sale of the unutilized FSI. Hence, the AO made disallowance on profits derived from the sale of unutilized FSI, by differentiating the same from the casual business activity of the asssessee. On appeal, both the CIT(A) and Tribunal took a contrary view.

High Court held that,

++ the assessee was in the process of developing three housing projects viz. Subhlaxmi, Samruddhi, Bhagyalaxmi. In such projects, considering the land area and the permissible FSI of 1.6, the assessee was entitled to carry out total construction of 20198 sq.mtrs, 11426 sq.mtrs and 13130 sq.mtrs respectively. As against this, the assessee had actually carried out construction of 4538.13 sq.mtrs, 2212.42 sq.mtrs and 2639.26 sq.mtrs respectively in these projects. That left unutilized FSI of 15659.87 sq.mtrs, 9213.58 sq.mtrs and 10490.74 sq.mtrs respectively. Thus, in each of the projects, the assessee had utilized about 20% or less of the permissible FSI. It was in this context that the AO had raised objection of the assessee's profit being derived through sale of unused FSI. Such an issue was examined by this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Moon Star Developers and following the same, Revenue's appeal is allowed. Judgement of the Tribunal and CIT (A) are reversed and that of AO is restored.

(See 2018-TIOL-917-HC-AHM-IT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS