✦ Bombay High Court · 22 Feb 2011

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Pune v. M/s. Sukhwani Chalw Buildon

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

The appeal is disposed off

Key paragraphs

  • Para 22. Counsel for both the sides agree that the questions raised in this appeal are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.1194 of 2010 [CIT V/s. Brahma Associates] decided by us…

Judgment

Mr. Vimal Gupta for the appellant. Mr. Jitendra Jain with Jas Sanghvi i/b. PDS Legal for respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : 22ND FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. :-

#1. The appeal was admitted on 1st December, 2010 on the following question of law:- (i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the deduction under section 80IB(10), as applicable prior to 1st April, 2005 is admissible in case of a "housing project" comprising of residential housing units and commercial establishments ? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the residential projects having commercial area upto 10% of the project is eligible for the claim of deduction for entire profits of project u/s.80IB(10) ? 2 itxa160-10

#2. Counsel for both the sides agree that the questions raised in this appeal are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.1194 of 2010 [CIT V/s. Brahma Associates] decided by us today i.e. 22/02/2011. Accordingly, the aforesaid questions are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The appeal is disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The appeal is disposed off

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 22 Feb 2011. The bench was MRIDULA BHATKAR, P DEVADHAR.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Income Tax Appeal No. 160 of 2010). ← Search more judgments