Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 340 - AT - Income TaxMiscellaneous Application – Rectification of mistake apparent from record or not - Applicability of section 50C – Speaking order passed by Tribunal or not – Held that:- A plain reading of section 50C as a whole makes it clear that filing of an appeal against valuation made by the stamp duty valuation authority for stamp duty purposes only makes the provision contained u/s 50C(2) inapplicable - the Tribunal while considering assessee’s appeal has exhaustively dealt with the terms and conditions of the special power of attorney and has held that nowhere it speaks of transfer of plot in the name of Smt. Neeraja Reddy - there is no documentary evidence to show that physical possession over the property was actually handed over in favour of Smt. Neeraja Reddy except recitals in the sale deed - If assessee’s claim that the property was transferred to Smt. Neeraja Reddy in 1994 is correct, then, there was no necessity of assessee taking responsibility of indemnifying purchaser in the event of any future claim over the property. The Tribunal has not only given a finding that there is no proof of payment of sale consideration of ₹ 1 lakh by Smt. Neeraja Reddy to assessee but the fact that assessee applied for permission to construct a house over the said plot in 2006 also proves that assessee was the owner of the property till it was sold to Shri G. Srinivas Reddy in the AY - the assessee herself declared the capital gain in the impugned AY and not in any earlier AY - the contention of assessee that Tribunal has committed a mistake by not taking into consideration all these facts and evidences while considering assessee’s submission in respect of applicability of section 50C is without merit - the Tribunal consciously came to a conclusion that the property was transferred by assessee in the AY and upheld the applicability of section 50C. - Rectification denied on this ground. The Tribunal has taken a decision in respect of the year of taxability on capital gain as well as the application of section 50C on overall consideration of facts and materials on record as well as the submissions made by parties, there is no reason to accept assessee’s contention that the order by the Tribunal is erroneous - assessee is only trying to reargue his case and wants a review of the order passed by the Tribunal – This is not within the scope and ambit of section 254(2) of the Act, which envisages rectification of mistake apparent on the face of record – Tribunal has not given any finding either way on the aforesaid grounds raised by assessee - Therefore, there is a mistake in the order of the Tribunal to that extent - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|