High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Tax Appeal in Income Tax Deduction Case — Rear Courtyard Not Part of Built-Up Area for Section 80-IB(10) Computation. The court held that the Tribunal cannot inquire into matters beyond the lis between the parties.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA In Favour of Accused
  • 22
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, M/s. Commonwealth Developers, a partnership firm, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2006-07 declaring a total income of Rs.53,620/- on 30.10.2006. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 21.11.2008 accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) invoked jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act and set aside the order dated 30.3.2011, directing the Assessing Officer to examine the claim of deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Act. The Assessing Officer then examined the claim and disallowed the deduction, leading to appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance, prompting the appellant to file the present tax appeal before the High Court. The substantial questions of law framed were whether a rear courtyard enclosed by walls of a residential unit could be included as built-up area for the purpose of deduction under Section 80-IB(10), and whether the Tribunal could inquire into and get measured the courtyard which was not part of the lis. The High Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the appeal, holding that the rear courtyard is not part of the built-up area and the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by inquiring into matters beyond the lis. The court set aside the Tribunal's order and restored the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Headnote

A) Income Tax - Deduction under Section 80-IB(10) - Built-up Area - Rear Courtyard - The issue was whether a rear courtyard enclosed by walls of a residential unit could be included as built-up area for computing deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court held that the rear courtyard is not part of the built-up area and cannot be included for the purpose of deduction. (Paras 1-2)

B) Income Tax - Tribunal's Jurisdiction - Inquiry Beyond Lis - The question was whether the Tribunal can inquire into and get measured the courtyard which was not included in the built-up area and which is not the lis between the parties. The court held that the Tribunal cannot inquire into matters beyond the lis between the parties. (Paras 1-2)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the rear courtyard enclosed by walls of a residential unit could be included as built-up area of the residential unit, and whether the learned Tribunal can inquire into and get measured the courtyard which was not included in the built-up area and which is not the lis between the parties.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. The order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is set aside. The matter is restored to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Law Points

  • Built-up area definition
  • Section 80-IB(10) deduction
  • Tribunal's jurisdiction to inquire beyond lis
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (BOM) (03) 98

TAX APPEAL NO. 4 OF 2014

2014-03-11

SMT. R. S. DALVI, F. M. REIS

Mr. Chythanya K. K. with Mr. Shailesh Redkar for appellant, Ms. Asha Desai for respondent

M/s. Commonwealth Developers

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Tax appeal against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal disallowing deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the Tribunal's order and allow deduction under Section 80-IB(10).

Filing Reason

Disallowance of deduction under Section 80-IB(10) by the Assessing Officer, upheld by the Tribunal.

Previous Decisions

Assessing Officer passed order under Section 143(3) on 21.11.2008; CIT set aside order under Section 263 on 30.3.2011; AO disallowed deduction; CIT(A) dismissed appeal; Tribunal upheld disallowance.

Issues

Whether the rear courtyard enclosed by walls of a residential unit could be included as built-up area of the residential unit for deduction under Section 80-IB(10). Whether the learned Tribunal can inquire into and get measured the courtyard which was not included in the built-up area and which is not the lis between the parties.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the rear courtyard is not part of the built-up area and should not be included for deduction under Section 80-IB(10). Respondent argued that the Tribunal correctly included the courtyard as built-up area.

Ratio Decidendi

The rear courtyard enclosed by walls of a residential unit is not part of the built-up area for the purpose of deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal cannot inquire into matters beyond the lis between the parties.

Judgment Excerpts

Whether the rear courtyard inclosed by walls of a residential unit could be included as built-up area of the residential unit ? Whether the learned Tribunal can inquire into and get measured the courtyard which was not included in the built-up area and which is not the lis between the parties ?

Procedural History

Appellant filed return on 30.10.2006; AO passed order under Section 143(3) on 21.11.2008; CIT set aside order under Section 263 on 30.3.2011; AO disallowed deduction; CIT(A) dismissed appeal; Tribunal upheld disallowance; present appeal filed.

Acts & Sections

  • Income Tax Act, 1961: 80-IB(10), 143(3), 263
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Tax Appeal in Income Tax Deduction Case — Rear Courtyard Not Part of Built-Up Area for Section 80-IB(10) Computation. The court held that the Tribunal cannot inquire into matters beyond the lis between the parties...
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Dismisses Petition Seeking Appointment as Shikshan Sahayak Due to Non-Completion of B.Ed. Degree Within Prescribed Time Limit. Petitioner's Selection Cancelled as He Failed to Submit B.Ed. Degree Certificate by the Cut-Off Date, Up...