2016 (2) TMI 81 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Shri Mathew C. Abraham Versus Asstt. CIT, CC-4, Surat
Unexplained investment in purchase of flat - Valuation of the residential flat - adoption of value as per jantri rate by CIT(A) - Held that - The assessee who is not having any business income and is only earning income from salary and interest is not required to maintain any books of account. However, assessee has submitted details of cash book ledger, balance sheet and purchase bills and submitted that all the investments made in residential fl.....
2016 (1) TMI 1083 - ITAT MUMBAI
A.C.I.T. -9 (3) , Mumbai Versus M/s. Swananda Properties Pvt. Ltd. and Vica-Versa
Accountability of project income - CIT(A) accounted for its income on project completion method - Held that - We are in agreement with the findings of the CIT(A) that the project was completed in the assessment year 2005-06 and the assessee had rightly accounted for its income on project completion method in the said year and not in AY 2004-05. BR BR Enhancement of assessment on the basis of fair market price - Held that - The order of CIT(A) enh.....
2016 (2) TMI 340 - ITAT DELHI
DCIT, Circle-12 (1) , New Delhi Versus M/s Hi-Tech Residency Pvt. Ltd.
Unexplained credits introduced in the garb of unsecured loans - Accommodation entries - Held that - CIT(A) has rightly held that when the assessee had provided the AO with the latest address of the squared up cash creditor (as the assessee had no such control on them therefore they were unable to produce before the AO and no further enquiries have been done of any kind by the AO) Ld. CIT(A) found that even the basic step i.e. summons or query let.....
2015 (12) TMI 980 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
PR. Commissioner of Income Tax-3 Versus Shri Rajabhai Lumbhabhai Hadiya
Capital gain computation - Whether ITAT was right in ignoring the fact that as per provisions of section 50-C (2)(b) the matter should not have been referred by CIT(A) for valuation as the assessee had already challenged the Juntry Value assessable by the Stamp Valuation authority, before the Nayab Collector and in that case, further reference to valuation is prohibited as per the Act and value determined by Nayab Collector has to be adopted as f.....
2016 (1) TMI 865 - ITAT MUMBAI
Shri Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-18 (1) (3) , Mumbai
Capital gain computation - Applicability of section 50C - Held that - Admittedly, the MIDC has originally given the lease of the land in the year 1964. The Assessee had purchased the leasehold rights in the property in 1991 for a sum of ₹ 9 lakhs and after carrying out his business for 15 years had sold the same for ₹ 25 lakhs vide deed of assessment dated 29.04.05. Hence, the assessee had sold the leasehold rights for the remaining p.....
2015 (12) TMI 987 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Shri Mohd. Imran Baig Versus Income Tax Officer Ward 3 (1) , Hyderabad
Computation of capital gains - whether the date of agreement or the date of execution of sale deed has to be considered for the purpose of adopting the SRO value under S.50C? - Held that - For want of any evidence to the contrary, we hold that the property in question was in residential zone on the date of transfer and therefore, the SRO value for residential property as on 6.3.2006 or the sale consideration received by the assessee whichever is .....
2015 (11) TMI 935 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Shri Haresh Jagmohandas Mehta, Shri Vijay Jagmohandas Mehta, Shri Jagmohandas Mehta, HUF
Additions of unaccounted investment u/s.69B - unaccounted and undisclosed capital gains - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - There is no dispute about the factual position that the Assessing Officer revised purchase and sale prices of assessee s lands in respect to his transactions executed in the relevant previous year by treating SUDA auction prices of developed land and State Government s revised jantri prices applicable from 01.04.2008.....
2016 (1) TMI 486 - ITAT LUCKNOW
Income Tax Officer 2 (2) , Kanpur Versus Shri. Hari Om Gupta
Long Term Capital Gain on sale of lease hold property by the assessee - invocation of the provisions of section 50C in transfer of leasehold right - Held that - From the transactions, it appears that it was a distress sale and the market value of the property cannot be assessed for computing the long term capital gain. Moreover, we have also examined the other aspects of invocation of provisions of section 50C of the Act relating to leasehold rig.....
2015 (11) TMI 866 - ITAT JAIPUR
Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 (2) , Jaipur and Others Versus Alok Mukherjee (Individual) and Vica-Versa and Others
Assessability of long term capital gain in respect of four properties sold by the assessee in the hands of HUF - assessee has challenged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer on the ground that the provisions of Section 2(47)(v) of the Act is applicable on this transfer, Section 50C is not applicable on this transaction and year of assessability is A.Y. 2003-04 and not for A.Y. 2004-05 - Held that - On the basis of alleged agreement to sell a.....
2016 (1) TMI 165 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
The ITO, Ward-8 (1) , Ahmedabad Versus Rupesh Balwantbhai Brahmbhatt and Vica-Versa
Eligibility for concessional tax treatment u/s.111 - CIT(A) directing to consider the business income from share trading of ₹ 1,15,01,549/- as short term capital gain - Held that - The intention of the assessee has to be seen and in the facts of the case it has been strongly pleaded that the intention of the appellant was to make investments and to make gain on sale of shares and it was not to do share trading. Even in earlier year, ie. A.Y.....
2015 (11) TMI 491 - ITAT MUMBAI
Income Tax Officer, Ward–20 (2) (1) , Mumbai Versus Legal Heir of Shri Durgaprasad Agnihotri
Claim of the assessee made under section 54EC denied - short term capital gain u/s 50 of the Act on depreciable assets of shops - Held that - The capital asset sold by the assessee during the year is a shop, comprising of land (or rights therein) as well as building or the super-structure thereon, which are separate and distinct assets under the Act (refer CIT v. Alps Theatre 1967 (3) TMI 6 - SUPREME Court and CIT v. Citi Bank N.A. 2003 (4) TMI 9.....
2015 (10) TMI 1092 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Agra Versus Sh. Shimbhu Mehra, Sh. Vishnu Saran Mehra, Shri Jagdish Saran Mehra, Shri Suman Mehra, Shri Kesho Mehra, Sh. Shankar Saran Mehra
Applicability of section 50C - profit or gains arising from a transfer of capital asset - Held that - Explanation 2 to Section 2(47) of the Act was added by Finance Act, 2012 with retrospective effect on 1.4.1962 and, consequently, the said provision would be applicable. The said explanation clearly provides that transfer of an asset includes disposing of or parting with an asset by way of an agreement. BR BR In the light of the aforesaid provisi.....
2016 (1) TMI 70 - ITAT MUMBAI
Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Shri Nadir Nazarali Dhanani And Vica-Versa
Applicability of section 50C on lease hold rights - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - As the assessee was having only lease hold rights for a period of 60 years, he cannot be considered to be the owner of the property so as to compute capital gain by adopting the market value as per the provisions of section 50C of the Act. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we agree with the decisions of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in deleting t.....
2015 (12) TMI 131 - ITAT CHENNAI
Smt. N. Saraswathy Versus The Income-tax Officer, Ward-XIV (2) , Chennai.
Adoption of fair market value of capital asset as on 1.4.1981 and also adoption of value u/s.50C(2)for computation of capital gains - Held that - In this case, the AO adopted the fair market value of the land as on 1.4.1981 at ₹ 30,000/- per ground as against ₹ 3 lakhs adopted by the assessee, on the basis of valuation of Sub- Registrar s office, which was not put before the assessee for comments. Further, the AO adopted the sale cons.....
2015 (12) TMI 389 - ITAT DELHI
ITO, Ward 45 (1) , New Delhi Versus Pinky Ganju
Additions u/s 69B - unexplained investment - CIT(A) deleted the addition invoking the provisions of Section 50-C - Held that - In this case, the property was allotted by Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd. at its market value based on the rate of return from rentals and it was business asset for them. Therefore, the provisions of Section 50C will not be applicable in the case of purchaser of the property. The space was already rented, therefore, .....