Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 85 - AT - Income TaxDetermination of the value of the land for the purpose of computation of capital gains in the hands of the assessee - Held that:- The value of the land has to be taken only as ₹ 10.50 Crores. In case the value shown in the sale agreement as ₹ 10.50 Crores is less than the value determined by the stamp authorities, then at the best, the guideline value can be taken as value of the land. Therefore, the lower authorities are not justified in estimating the value of the land on the basis of the material relatable to M/s Coromandel Cables Pvt. Ltd. Income-tax proceeding, being a judicial proceeding, the assessment has to be made on the basis of material available on record. Documents relating to other assessees cannot be placed reliance in the case of present assessee unless there is sufficient reason to rely upon that document. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there is no material available on record to suggest that the assessee received more than ₹ 10.50 Crores as disclosed in the sale agreement dated 1.04.2008. Therefore, the lower authorities are not correct in estimating the value of the land on the basis of the materials relating to M/s Coromandel Cables Pvt. Ltd. this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that in the absence of any other material, the lower authorities have no other way except to accept the value of the land at ₹ 10.50 Crores as disclosed in the sale agreement dated 1.04.2008. Accordingly the orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Sharing ratio of the developed project - CIT(Appeals) reduced it to 40% as against 45% determined by the Assessing Officer - Held that:- By efflux of time, the cost of construction or cost of land might have increased. However, the percentage of the share would not increase. If the assessee entered into an agreement for sharing the constructed area at 37.5% in the year 2005, the same sharing ratio would continue in 2008 also. By efflux of time, the cost may increase, accordingly the price may also increase, it does not mean that the share in constructed area would also increase due to efflux of time. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(Appeals) has rightly reduced the sharing ratio to 40% as against the ratio determined by the Assessing Officer at 45%. Therefore, this Tribunal do not have any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(Appeals) and accordingly, the same is confirmed. - Decided against revenue. Penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) - Held that:- As during the course of survey, the so-called incriminating material, including joint development agreement dated 23.11.2005, in respect of M/s Coromandel Cables Pvt. Ltd. was found. In fact, no material was found relating to the present assessee. On the basis of the material found in the case of M/s Coromandel Cables Pvt. Ltd., the value of the land was estimated. In the earlier part of this order, while considering the quantum addition made by the Assessing Officer, this Tribunal found that there cannot be any addition on the basis of the material relatable to M/s Coromandel Cables Pvt. Ltd. In the absence of any material in respect of the present assessee other than the agreement for sale dated 1.04.2008, which discloses the sale consideration at ₹ 10.50 Crores, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(Appeals) has rightly deleted the penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|