NOIDA: The flat owners of cooperative housing society may move to court for help as Noida Authority have been charged them under hefty fines for unable to register their housing units on time. According to the flat owners, the Noida Authority has alleged that they haven’t registered their houses. As owners have missed the deadline of 25th Jan which has been fixed by the Apex court on inability to submit completion certificate mandatory for home registration.
President of Federation of RWAs of Sector 62, S M Singh said that “there are several societies those still haven’t done with the issuing of completion certificate whereas members have purchased flats decade back.”

Mumbai:On Tuesday Peddar road residents moved to Bombay High Court opposing to construction of a proposed film museum, an amphitheater and a basement parking lot in the area. Emphasizing it to direct the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and the Director General of Films Division to shift the project to Film City in Goregaon, which they termed “an appropriate alternative location.”
Despite alleging irregularities in granting permission for construction activities by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), residents of St Helen’s Court, Sterling Co-operative Housing Society, Ajoomal Co-operative Housing Society and Sett Minar Co-operative Housing Society, have also said that the proposed construction in the Films Division premises at Peddar Road violates the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Preservation of Trees Act, 1975, the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, Development Control (DC) Regulations and Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) regulations.

There are so far 25 housing societies have applied for polling booths in their vicinity

Pune: The commissioner of state election Neela Satyanarayan has allowed setting up polling booths in private properties comprising co-operative housing societies has taken a robust move in the right direction.
The State Election Commission (SEC) has taken this decision as schools and colleges are engaged due to exams are going, so because of this only SEC has taken this alternate step for the ease of civic polls in Maharashtra which will be held in the second half of February. This decision is welcome as it stands to serve a larger purpose.
On the other hand another reason would be that, the polling response from the cooperative housing societies are very poor, SEC senior official said. Another big reason is the big dilemma over voter list, so it would certainly help us, they added. This method will also benefit to save the timing.
In the aftermath of this decision, there are so far 25 housing societies have applied for polling booths in their vicinity

By Accommodation Times (www.accommodationtimes.com)
1. Can Managing committee (MC) of society levy Penalty? Are they competent authority to fix and charge penalty after getting members concurrence in special general body meeting? If they are not the competent authority to fix and charge, penalties then pl. advise me the section / clause under which they are not the competent authority to fix and charge penalty.

Ans:- NO, MC cannot levy penalty. They are not competent authority to fix and charge penalty. The Managing Committee by approval of the General Body shall fix on every flat the society charges, on the basis laid down as under the Bye-laws No. 69(a). A member who has committed default in payment of the charges of the society, it can be recovered by simple interest at such rate as is fixed by the General Body of the Society at its meeting, subject to the maximum of 21(%) percent per annum, from the date the amount was delayed till its payment not paid by the members within the period as prescribed under Bye-laws No. 70.
Complaint to be made to the General Body of the society when levy of excess fine, by the managing Committee for act of the member which is in violation of the bye-laws and Act n Rules of MCS.

2. Can they ( MC ) give on rent the vacant space of paid podium parking meant for escape route in case of fire emergency ? If not, then what consequence MC has to face under section / clause of any ACT related to the issue. Is it a cause to human loss in case of fire? If it is a cause of human loss in case of fire then under which clause of the any ACT action can be taken against the MC? and also the concerned authorities where complaints may be lodged.

Ans:- NO, MC cannot give on rent the vacant space of paid podium parking for escape escape route in case of fire emergency, MC has to face same consequence what Builder has to face under MOFA Act for not keeping escape route in case of fire emergency which is not limited to that even criminal case can be file against them because it will cause grave injury to life n limb, complaint can be also lodged to Police, Fire Department, BMC and Registrar of Cooperative.

3. Can they ( MC ) give on rent the vacant space of paid podium parking at Rs.1200/= per month while the current cost of paid podium parking in the same complex is around 5 lakhs ? Is not this parking is given like free of cost. Is it a financial irregularity? If it is financial irregularity like fraud / cheating etc. then under which clause of any ACT action can be taken against the MC? And also the concerned authorities where complaints may be lodged?

Ans:- Already explained above and yes it is financial irregularity you can file criminal complaint under misappropriation of funds under IPC and complaint can be also lodged to Police and Registrar of Cooperative.

The Direct Taxes Code (‘DTC’) Bill, 2010 is a progressive step form the Ministry of Finance to replace the five decade old Income-tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1 April, 2012. The legislature proposed under the DTC is framed in almost the similar trajectory as prevalent under the current Income-tax Act. On a birds eye comparison of the DTC with the original draft of DTC introduced in 2009, the latest version of the DTC clearly provides some respite to the taxpayers. Some of the noteworthy provisions of the DTC that will have significant influence on the real estate sector are discussed below:

Special Economic Zones

The Government of India had enacted the Special Economic Zones (‘SEZ’) Act five years ago with the objective of generation of additional economic activity, promotion of exports, promotion of investment from domestic and foreign sources, creation of employment opportunities and development of infrastructure facilities. In order to achieve the said objectives, the Government provided certain tax incentives to (i) developers for developing a SEZ by making huge investment in the form of capital and manpower and (ii) the units which would operate in a SEZ to manufacture goods and services that could be exported from India. The said tax benefits were introduced in the Income-tax Act and made available to all SEZ developers and units who satisfied the requisite conditions by obtaining the necessary registrations from the SEZ authorities. The DTC has resulted in a set back for the SEZ developers and units by shifting the tax incentive from a 100% profit linked deduction to an investment linked deduction. The profit linked deduction available to SEZ developers notified before 31 March, 2012 and units in SEZ which commence business operations in a SEZ before 31 March, 2014 would be grandfathered. The investment-linked incentive regime simply means that the SEZ businesses will get accelerated depreciation; this will be less preferred to the existing one available by way of deduction of entire profits. In the long run, however, the change in the incentive regime will not only signal uncertainty and lack of commitment to the policy but will also affect the attractiveness of SEZs. In addition, the DTC also provides for levy of Minimum Alternate Tax at 20% on the book profits of the developers and units. The levy of MAT may itself question the very existence of SEZ developers and units and may take SEZs out of business. Enactment of the DTC provisions in the current form may go against the basic objective of enactment of the SEZ Act, i.e. promotion of exports and investments, creation of employment opportunities and development of infrastructure facilities.

Housing Projects and Industrial Parks

The profit linked deduction available to housing projects and industrial parks on satisfaction of the prescribed conditions under the provisions of Income-tax Act would continue to be available under the DTC if the assessees are eligible to claim the deduction for assessment year beginning 1 April, 2012. However, new housing projects and industrial parks would not be eligible for any tax benefits under the provisions of the DTC.

Slum Rehabilitation projects

The DTC provides investment linked incentive for developing and building a housing project under a scheme of slum re-development or rehabilitation pursuant to a scheme framed and notified by the Central or State Government.

Characterisation of Income

The issue of characterizing income earned from lease of property as Income from House Property or Business Income under the current provisions was always a subject matter of litigation and this issue has been put to rest under the DTC. Under the DTC, any income from letting out of house property will be characterised as Income from House Property. However, there is an exception carved out for income earned from property which is used as hospital, hotel, convention centre, cold storage and Special Economic Zone for which the income would be characterized as Business Income.

Residential house property

 The current tax provisions requires assessees to pay tax on every house property (except one self-occupied property) on the basis of actual rent or notional rent irrespective of the fact whether property is actually let out or not. Under the DTC provisions, taxes would be payable only on the properties which are actually let out and the concept of deemed let out has been done away with. Thus, investors who have invested in multiple house properties and which are lying vacant would not be liable to pay taxes on notional rental income basis. DTC provisions on wealth tax on house property continues to be in line with the current wealth tax provisions wherein an exemption is provided from applicability of wealth tax for one house property not exceeding 500 sq. mts. belonging to an individual or HUF.

Capital Gains on transfer of house property

Under DTC, capital gains on transfer of house property would be chargeable to tax at the ordinary rates applicable to the taxpayer. However, indexation benefits would be allowed where such property is held for a period greater than 12 months from the end of financial year of its acquisition. Under the current regime, indexation benefits are allowed only for assets held for a period greater than 36 months. Also, the indexation base date has been shifted from 1 April, 1981 to 1 April, 2000 and assessees may take the fair market value as on 1 April, 2000 as cost of acquisition at their option. All in all, on the face of it, DTC may have benefited Indian tax payers due to some of the provisions, but it within its ambit some disappointment for the SEZ sector. The Ministry of Commerce did manage to water down some of the provisions proposed under the earlier draft of DTC with respect to SEZ units. It will have to be seen whether the Ministry of Commerce and various other stake holders can further voice their opinion to simplify the SEZ benefits before the DTC becomes law.

While calculating the FSI, certain areas have been exempted including lifts and staircases under the development control regulation no. 35 (2)(c). Despite of that, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation ( BMC) has been levying a premium for allowing builders to avail of such concessions.

The Bombay High Court recently has held that the Corporation does not have the authority to levy premium or any such amount in the absence of any express provisions in the MRTP Act or DC Regulations. A division bench of justice F.I.Rebello and justice Ahmed Sayed has declared  the clarificatory order issued by the Secretary to the Government holding that the term “ with special permission of Municipal Commisioner” entitled the Commissioner to impose conditions like charging of premium as ultra vires to regulation no. 35 (2)(c) and or provision of the act and the rules. The court has instructed BMC for refunding the premiums that were collected from builders within two months or to pay interest at 8% per annum on delayed payments.

Granting such FSI has been kept in abeyance by the BMC authority.

Authors : K. K. Ramani and N.C. Jain

Publisher : Outlook Group.

Price : Rs.550/-

Edition: 1st Edition 2010

Review : Shri K K Ramani is a reputed advocate and authority in Real Estate related law. Shri N C Jain has a brilliant academic record and his legal practice have earned him great name in the legal circles. The book is well timed where recently enacted Limited Liability Partnership law needs clarification and to understand its process and authority. To under stand LLPs process and procedures the book have well defined two parts which includes 29 chapters in all.
Total 536 pages with colour on cover and well designed outline of the book, is a must i the liabrary of professionals especially for Chartered Accountants and professional working in finance field.