Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 80 - AT - Income TaxCost of acquisition - succession or inheritance - cost of improvement - Held that:- Following Salay Mohamad Ibrahim Sait v. ITO [1994 (5) TMI 18 - KERALA High Court] - The capital asset had become the property of the assessee by succession or inheritance on the death of the previous owner under section 49(1) of the Act and the cost of acquisition of the asset is to be deemed to be the cost for which the previous owner acquired it, as increased by the cost of any improvement of the assets incurred or borne either by the previous owner or by the assessee - Having regard to the definition of the expression "cost of improvement" contained in section 55(1)(b) of the Act - In order to claim cost of acquisition - The expenditure should have been incurred in making any additions or alterations to the capital asset that was originally acquired by the previous owner and if the previous owner had mortgaged the property and the assessee and his co-owners cleared off the mortgage so created, it could not be said that they incurred any expenditure by way of effecting any improvement to the capital asset that was originally purchased by the previous owner - Decided against assessee. Applicability of section 50C - Held that: - Following Smt. Farida Alladin V/s. Asst. CIT [2014 (1) TMI 101 - ITAT HYDERABAD] - The claim of the assessee that land has been sold by the an agreement of sale in the earlier years has not been substantiated by evidence - The only material is available with the assessee is that the preamble of the document, which states that the agreement has been entered into at a prior date and this by itself cannot be sufficient to conclude that the agreement has been honoured by the assessee and acted upon prior to the enactment of section 50C - Decided against assessee.
|