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

No protective addition required when additions is confirmed in hands of searched person – ITAT

No protective addition required in the hand of a third party when additions have been confirmed in the hands of…

18 hours ago
  • arbitration

Limitation u/s 34 of Arbitration Act commences on disposal of application u/s 33 by Arbitral Tribunal – SC

Limitation for filing application u/s 34 of Arbitration Act commence from date on which application u/s 33 is disposed of…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Case remanded in absence of finding if disallowance u/s 40A(3) covered by Rule 6DD

Case remanded as no finding was given whether cash payments disallowed u/s 40A(3) were covered by Rule 6DD under Income…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

For investment in share capital, source of investment is outside the control of the investee company

In case of investment in share capital, the source of investment may remain outside the control of the investee company.…

6 days ago
  • ICAI

ICAI issues revised Code of Ethics (13th edition)- Applicable Dates

ICAI issues revised Code of Ethics (13th edition) ICAI has released revised Code of Ethics (13th edition). The revised Code…

1 week ago
  • SEBI

Modified Norms for Nomination in Demat Accounts and Mutual Fund Folio

Modified Norms for Nomination in Demat Accounts and Mutual Fund Folio SEBI has modified Norms on Nomination to be implemented…

2 weeks ago