9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 781X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into an agreement dated 2nd September, 2004 with one, Bhagyalakshmi Commercial Company Pvt. Ltd. Under the aforesaid agreement the latter agreed to sub-lease the flat nos. 3b and 3c at premises no.5, Lowdon Street, Kolkata to the assessee. The assessee on his part entered into an agreement dated 5th May, 2005 with one, Onkar Management Pvt. Ltd. agreeing to transfer the aforesaid two flats at a consideration of Rs.90 lakhs. The assessee took an advance of a sum of Rs.10,000/-. The assessee, however, in breach of agreement dated 5th May, 2005 transferred the flats on 4th August, 2006 to Poonam Agarwal at a sum of Rs.2 crore 20 lakhs. Onkar Management Pvt. Ltd. sued the assessee for recovery of damages. An award was passed on 30th September, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the capital gains. He, in support of his submission, relied upon a judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. Attili N. Rao, reported in (2003) 9 Supreme Court Cases 658. What had happened in that case was that the assessee was in debt payable to the Excise Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh. In order to secure the debt the assessee mortgaged his immovable property which, at a later date, was sold by public auction. A sum of Rs.5,62,980/- was realised. The State deducted a sum of Rs.1,29,020/- towards debt due by the assessee to the State and the balance sum was made over to the assessee. The assessee contended that the sum of Rs.1,29,020/- due by him to the State should be deducted from the total cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ose and R filed a suit for specific performance and there was a settlement whereby the assessee agreed to pay certain sum of money to R and in the meantime, the assessee entered into another agreement of sale in 1967 in respect of the same property with one C and C gave an assurance to R that on the completion of the sale, they would deduct a sum of Rs.35,504/- from the total consideration and pay it to R. The assessee claimed that the sum of Rs.35,504/- from the total consideration and pay it to R. The assessee claimed that the sum of Rs.35,504/- should be allowed as deduction for the purpose of computing her income from capital gains. The Bombay High Court held that unless the assessee had settled the dispute with R, the sale transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
