1 itxa854-06+2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.854 OF 2008 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.855 OF 2008 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1058 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-25 ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Saroj Sales Organization ..Respondent. Mr. S.K. Bhatnagar with N.R. Prajapati for the appellant. Mr. S.N. Inamdar, senior Advocate with Ms. A. Vessanji and S.J. Mehta for respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : 22ND FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. :- 1. The above appeals were admitted on 22nd September, 2008 on the following question of law:- " Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in accepting the assessee's claim under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the profit derived from sale of shop holding that nowhere there is any contemplation for restricting the benefit only to residential units and not to the shops etc. even though section 80IB(10) refers only 2 itxa854-06+2 to residential units and the amendment including sub-clause (d) in respect of shops and commercial establishments was introduced in the said section with effect from 1st April, 2005 i.e. from AY 2005-06 and has no retrospective application . " 2. Counsel on both sides agree that the question of law raised in these appeals is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee by the judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.1194 of 2010 [CIT V/s. Brahma Associates] decided by us today i.e. 22/02/2011. Accordingly, the aforesaid question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. All the appeals are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)