TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of Long Term Capital Gain by enhancing the value of sale consideration set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No. 8847 & 8842/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 22-1-2014 - Shri P. M. Jagtap, AM And Shri Amit Shuka, JM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Rahul K. Hakani For the Respondent : Shri Pitambar Das ORDER Per P. M. Jagtap, A. M. These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against two separate orders passed by the ld. CIT(A) 38, Mumbai both dated 16-09-2011 for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 and since common issues are involved therein, the same have been heard together and are being disposed of by single consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. First we shall take up the appeal of the assessee for A.Y.- 2007-08 being ITA No. 8847/Mum/2011. 3. The relevant facts of the case giving rise of this appeal are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Income tax Act, 1962 (the Act) was conducted in the case of the assessee as well as other persons belonging to the same family/group. Pursuant to the said action, notice u/s.153-C was issued by the AO in response to which the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Accordingly, the Long Term Capital Gain as worked out by him by taking the said amount as sale consideration was brought to tax by the AO in the hands of the assessee as well as the other persons belonging to the same group/family in the ratio of their respective share holding in M/s. Kamala Mansion Pvt. Ltd. On appeal, the ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO on this issue. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds: - 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) hereinafter called CIT(A) erred in confirming invocation of the provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act 1961 even though the document for sale of shares of M/s. Kamala Mansion Pvt. Ltd. was not required to be registered with stamp authorities and in determining the sale value at Rs.4,12,16,500/- against agreement value of Rs.3,46,71,609/- while working out the capital gain on sale of shares of M/s. Kamala Mansion Pvt. Ltd. The Purchaser of the shares of the company are not relatives of the Directors/shareholders of the company nor they have any business Rela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section refers to the expressions ie capital asset, being land or building or both , assessed (assessable does not apply to the AY in question), capital asset, being land or building or both , deemed to be the full value of the consideration etc. The above sub-section provides for meaning of the full value of the consideration (FVC) and it is a deemed definition. Accordingly, when the assessee transfers a capital asset being land or building or both, for a consideration lesser than the value adopted, assessed by any authority of a State Government, the value so adopted or assessed shall be deemed to the full value consideration for the purpose of computing capital gains u/s 48 of the Act. The expression assessable has inserted into the statute for perspective application w.e.f 1.10.2009 whereas the assessment year under consideration is 2007-08 and 2008-09. The capital assets that are covered under the provisions are land or building or both. Expression transfer shall have to be a direct transfer as defined u/s 2(47) of the Act which does not include the tax planning adopted by the assessee. It is settled issue that the provisions of section 50C are deemed provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) hereinafter called CIT(A) erred in Confirming invocation of the provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act 1961 even though the document for sale of shares of BLUE DIAMOND REALATORS P. LTD was not required to be registered with stamp authorities and in determining the sale value at Rs. 3,02,68,784/- against agreement value of Rs.1,47,00,000/- while working out the capital gain on sale of shares of BLUE DIAMOND REALATORS P.LTD. The purchasers of the shares of the company are not relatives of the Directors/Shareholders of the company nor they have any business Relationship with the Directors / Shareholders or any associates thereof. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT (A) erred in confirming addition of Rs.94,08,637/- to the sale consideration being separate payment to the company for repayment of loan taken by the company for purchase of the property. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT (A) erred in computing short term capital gains on sale of shares of BLUE DIAMOND REALATORS P. LTD against long term cap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
