I.T.O. Vs. MALA MOHAN BAJAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 17 -05 -2013 of the CIT(A) -II, Pune relating to Assessment Year 2010 -11.

(2.) FACTS of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and carrying on the business of executing a housing project at Pisoli, Pune in the name and style of Sai Promoters. He is also the proprietor of Mala Estate and Investments. He filed his return of income on 15 -10 -2010 declaring total income of Rs. 9,75,040/ - after claiming deduction of Rs. 39,78,646/ - u/s. 80IB(10) of the I.T. Act. The aforesaid deduction u/s. 80IB(10) was for the profits derived from the housing project located at Pisoli, Taluka Haveli, Dist. Pune. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO noted that the housing project of the assessee was granted approval by the Collector vide letter dated 30 -03 -2007. However, no completion certificate in respect of the project from the local authority was filed by the assessee. On being confronted by the AO regarding the admissibility of the claim, the assessee vide letter dated 03 -12 -2012 submitted as under:

(3.) BEFORE CIT(A) it was submitted that project was physically complete before the scheduled date of completion, i.e. 31 -03 -2012. It was submitted that the architect has certified the completion of the project on 02 -03 -2011 and the said completion certificate from the architect was filed with the local authority on 05 -03 -2011 and the local authority had not raised any objection to the same till date. It was submitted that the receipt of the completion certification application is confirmed by the local authority, i.e. Gram Panchayat vide letter/certificate dated 17 -12 -2012. It was submitted that mere non -compliance with the machinery requirement provided in the Explanation is consequential and does not go against the claim of the assessee. Relying on the following decisions it was submitted that the deduction has to be allowed: