Income Tax

15% deduction for CPWD and State PWD rate variation allowable when AO estimated construction cost based on valuation cell report using CPWD Rates

15% deduction for CPWD and State PWD rate variation allowable when AO estimated the cost of building construction based on the report of the valuation cell. This was stated by ITAT Visakhapatnam in a recent judgment as under:

Case Law Details:
I.T.A.No.430/Vizag/2014  Assessment Year: 2007-08
B. Madhusudhana Reddy  vs. ACIT
Date of Judgment/Order: 06/05/2016

Brief Facts of the Case:
During the course of the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3), the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had constructed a two storied building and the cost of construction shown by the assessee was Rs. 42,13,860/- which was supported by the valuation report of an approved valuer, according to which cost of construction of the building was of Rs. 42.09 lakhs after claiming self supervision charges at 7.5%. The A.O. was of the opinion that the cost of construction shown by the assessee was low, therefore, he referred the case to valuation cell which estimated the cost of construction at Rs. 51.54 lakhs. The assessee submitted that the building was constructed far away from Vijayawada city for which P.W.D. rates were to be applied and if at all, CPWD rates were applied, 15% deduction should have been given to the assessee. However, the A.O. not accepted the submissions made by the assessee and based on the report of the Valuation Cell, made an addition of Rs. 9,45,000/-.

On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the A.O. On being aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal.

Important Excerpts from ITAT Judgment:

The case of the assessee is that the assessee has constructed a building in a rural area though comes under the purview of the Vijayawada city, CPWD rates cannot be applied but only PWD rates are to be applied. In case where CPWD rates are applied, 15% deduction towards the rate variation between CPWD & PWD should be given to the assessee. This aspect was not disputed by the department. Admittedly, the fact remains that the cost of construction was estimated by the A.O. based on the report of the valuation cell, which has in turn estimated the cost of construction based on the CPWD rates. Therefore, in our opinion, the assessee is entitled for 15% deduction towards the rate variation between CPWD & State PWD and further deduction of 7.5% towards self supervision charges from the value arrived by the DVO applying the CPWD rates. Ordered accordingly. 

download full judgment

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Receipts mentioning that it was towards corpus, donation assumed to be for corpus of trust

In the absence of objection by donors to receipts mentioning that donations were towards corpus, it is assumed that donations…

3 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Credit in partner’s capital account for book entry adjustments can not be added u/s 68

Credit in assessee’s capital account consequent to book entry adjustments in the books of the partnership firm can not be…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 no ground to make addition u/s 68

Non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 by investing companies is no ground to make addition under section 68 of the…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Assessee not obliged to demonstrate actual utilization of donation u/s 35(1)(ii)

Assessee not obliged to demonstrate actual utilization of donation u/s 35(1)(ii) for scientific research made to an eligible institution In…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

For Registration u/s 12AB, phrase “genuineness of activities” is interpreted liberally

Phrase "genuineness of activities" has been interpreted liberally by various judicial forums including the ITAT and High Courts - ITAT…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

If AO rejects a reply, he has to offer opportunity of personal hearing to assessee

If assessing officer rejects a reply, he had to offer an opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee– Allahabad High…

3 days ago