The ownership of the land is not a criterion for claiming deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, and the completion certificate issued by the local authority is decisive in determining the entitlement to the deduction.

Both the assesseeas well as the Revenue have filed appeals as against the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07.

2. As far as Revenue's Appeals (T.C.(A)Nos.581 and 582 of 2011) are concerned, at the time of admission, the following substantial questions of law were admitted by this Court for consideration:

"1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in deciding the eligibility of deduction without considering the mandatory conditions stipulated u/s.80IB and 80IB(10) of the I.T.Act?

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in not giving any finding about the difference between developers, builders and construction contracts to claim deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act?

3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deciding that there need not be any cap of 10% for flats having built up area exceeing 1500 sq.ft. with regard to claim for deduction u/s.80IB of the Act?"

3. In the course of the hearing before this Court, the Revenue, however, presented a petition for reframing the questions of law, since the questions admitted did not project the issues fully. On a perusal of the questions now raised before this Court, after hearing the learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee, who had no serious objection for re-framing the questions, the following substantial questions of law, as reframed, arise for consideration:

"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that developer or builder, is eligible for claiming benefit under Section 80(IB) (10), and assessee can be treated as developer or builder, eligible for claiming benefit under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act?

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee had complied with the condition of submission of completion certificate from local authority within the time limit as per the provisions of Section 80IB (10)(a) of the Income Tax Act?

3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in that the assessee is entitled for the deduction under Section 80IB(10) for the housing project with respect to residential flats with built up area not exceeding 1500 sq.ft. even though in the same housing project, the assesseee had constructed flats exceeding built up area of 1500 sq.ft.?

4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Section 80IB(10) provide for partial deduction to the housing project with respect to residential flats with built up area of less than 1500 sq.ft. where the same project contains flats with built up area exceeding 1500 sq.ft.?"

4. The assessee is engaged in the business of developing construction of housing projects. It is seen from the facts narrated that the assessee had entered into an agreement with M/s.Hotel Mullai Pvt. Ltd. on 28th April, 2003 for joint development of the property in the name and style "Vimalachal" in Vepery, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai. The terms of agreement stated that the assessee had agreed to build an extent of 1,91,990sq.ft. super built-up area on the said property. The owner of the property, namely, M/s.Hotel Mullai Pvt. Ltd., would be paid a sum of Rs.600/- per sq.ft. worked out on the super built-up area as towards the sale of proportionate undivided share of the land transferred to the buyer and the aggregate amount payable to the owner of the property would be Rs.11,51,94,000/-. Clause 4 of the agreement stated that the assessee, as a builder, would collect the cost of the undivided share of the land and pay the same to the owner. Apart from that, relevant clauses for the purpose of considering the question herein are Clauses 7, 8, 11 and 12, which read as follows:

"Clause 7. The parties hereto agree