JUDGMENT :

M. Duraiswamy, J.

Challenging the order passed in I.T.A.No.1755/Mds/2013 in respect of the Assessment Year 2010-2011 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "C" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal), the Revenue has filed the above appeal.

2. The above appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the open terrace area should not be included while computing the built-up area for the purpose of claiming deduction under Section 801B(10)? ?

(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the time limit for completion of the eligible project should not be computed from the day on which the lay out was approved for the 1st time on 22.09.2003 but only from the date on which the building plan approval was obtained for the last time on 29.03.2007?

(iii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the completion certificate issued by Pallikaranai Panchayat would satisfy instead of completion of certificate issued by Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority who had originally approved the plan?”

3. When the appeal is taken up for hearing, Mr. M. Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant fairly submitted that the questions of law that are raised in the above appeal were already decided against the Revenue in the respondent-assessee's own case in respect of the Assessment Year 2009-2010 in I.T.A. No.16650/Mds/2012, dated 12.11.2013 vide para Nos. 21 to 25 of the Judgement, which reads as follows:-

“21. The second issue for our consideration is whether the approval of the Project and completion date is as per section 801B(10) of the Act or not. The assessee, initially entered into an agreement dated 15.06.2004 with 17 land owners to develop the land to the extent of 7.11 acres and built housing project on a layout, which has already been approved by the CMDA and paid advance of Rs.86,05000/-. Thereafter, the assessee has developed roads, parks, play areas, etc. The assessee has applied jar approval of construction of 3 prototype houses and the same was approved on by the Pallikaranai Panchayat and started negotiating with prospective buyers and after registration, the assessee has constructed independent house. The objection raised by the Assessing Officer that the 3 prototype houses are not having] acre area of land and therefore held that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under section 801B(10) on the ground that plot must be in 1 acre of land This aspect was considered by the Id. CIT(Appeals) in detail in his order at page 33 to 35. From the careful consideration of the assessment order and CIT(Appeals)'s order with details filed by the assessee in the paper book, we have to find whether the project undertaken by the assessee is on the size of the plot of land having an area of minimum-1 acre or not. The size of the plot, as taken by the assessee, is 7.11 acres and after developing roads, parks, play area, etc. the left over area for construction of the house is 3.675 acres. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not correct in saying that the housing project is not on a plot of acre area. The assessee has taken 3 prototype houses and got it approved from the local authority and on the basis of that the assessee has pursued prospective buyers and entered into an agreement for' construction as well as selling of the land and completed the housing project. The method adopted by the assessee is according to his business convenience and in our opinion, the housing project is on the size of plot of land haying more than 1 acre and therefore, on this account, the benefit available under section 801B(10) cannot be denied and the project constructed by the assessee is in 1 acre of land and we find, no reason to interfere with the order of the Id CIT(Appeals). Accordingly, the issue raised by the Revenue sta