TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... below was of the view that the assessee had acquired the property by way of four sale deeds, each of ₹ 4.50 lakhs, the total of which, was ₹ 18 lakhs - there was no agreement, nor any registered deed in that regard - The AO was right in noting that there was no mention in the sale deeds of ₹ 18 lakhs about purchase of the furniture and fixtures by way of a separate agreement for ₹ 12 lakhs - the deed of 2008 also does not give the inventory of the furniture and fixtures as sold in the year 2008, which aspect has been conceded by the assessee at the time of the arguments. Most of the items which are said to have been acquired are primarily “personal effects” which are excluded from the definition of capital asset u/s 2(14) of the Act if they are meant for personal use - ₹ 12 lakhs was for all the fixtures and fittings including furniture - the breakup of ₹ 12 lakhs was not given - the Authorities below were right in disallowing ₹ 12 lakhs for the purpose of computation of the capital gain – as such no substantial question of lawarises for consideration – Decided against assessee. - ITA 655/2014 - - - Dated:- 3-12-2014 - Sanjiv Khanna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r bill was submitted as a justification for reducing ₹ 12 lakhs. In this regard, the assessee vide order sheet entry dated November 23, 2011, was asked to explain the position. The assessee explained vide his reply dated November 28, 2011. Apart from the facts narrated above, it was also his case that in common parlance, a residential house denotes/means a habitable place. A house cannot be habitable without windows, wardrobes, geysers, electricity fans, lights etc. According to the assessee, all these items are necessary to make a house habitable. All the aforesaid items, although removable in the same manner as the house which is, breakable, but till the time, house remains, these attachment remains, for any house to be habitable. In the inventory details of purchases, the loose items were only two, cotton rugs of size 2 X 2 and two Pooja Stools, the cost of which would not have been more than ₹ 5000/-. 6. The Assessing officer did not agree with the stand taken by the assessee and as such, did not allow the deduction at ₹ 12 lakhs from the sale consideration holding such items as furniture covered under the definition of personal asset . The Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), after noting the reasons given by the Assessing Officer in rejecting the claim of the assessee, has held as under: After considering the grounds raised by the appellant and the facts of the case and the opinion of the assessing officer, I find that only on the basis of a bill which is for furniture, it cannot be assumed that the payment is for acquisition of the house property and should be added to the cost of acquisition. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that the Assessing Officer has correctly reduced the payment made for acquisition of furniture from the cost of acquisition. The capital gain worked out by the assessing officer after reducing the cost of furniture from the cost of acquisition is correct and there is no need to interfere with that. The grounds raised on the issue are dismissed . 8. The issues raised in the third and fourth appeals are not subject matter of this appeal and hence are not referred to. 9. The appellant assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal, raising only two grounds, which are reproduced as under: 1. That Ld Assessing Officer has grossly erred in not considering 12,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , even though, does not form part of the sale deeds, the said furniture must be construed to have been acquired at the time of purchase. He would state that when the appellant had sold the property, he is entitled to the deduction of the said amount for the purpose of computing capital gain. 13. On the other hand, Ms.Suruchi Aggarwal, learned Sr.Standing Counsel appearing for the revenue would support the conclusion of the Authorities below, stating that, the same is a reasoned order, considering all the aspects of the case and seek dismissal of the appeal. 14. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we note that the issue which arises for our consideration is whether ₹ 12 lakhs paid by the appellant assessee to the seller at the time of purchase of the property in question must be construed as a cost of acquisition of the asset so as to be deducted from the full value of consideration received by the appellant assessee at the time when he had sold and transferred the property in question. Section 48 of the Act stipulates the manner in which the capital gain shall be calculated. We reproduce the said Section as under: Section 48: The income chargeable u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the seller of the property to the appellant assessee had, in fact, sought the benefit of the capital gain. The inventory has noted to mean except two cotton rugs size 2 X 2 and two Pooja stools is vague. Similarly, the deed of 2008 also does not give the inventory of the furniture and fixtures as sold in the year 2008, which aspect has been conceded by the learned counsel for the appellantassessee at the time of the arguments. These findings are primarily findings of fact. 17. Further, the issue can be looked from another perspective, which is, most of the items which are said to have been acquired, are primarily personal effects which are excluded from the definition of capital asset under Section 2(14) of the Act if they are meant for personal use. It is not the case of the appellant-assessee that the items like wooden temple, crockery, fans, geysers, light fittings etc. were not for personal use, nor such a case was put forth before the Authorities below. In fact, ₹ 12 lakhs was for all the fixtures and fittings including furniture. It is noted, the break up of ₹ 12 lakhs was not given. In any case, as noticed above it is a pure question of fact. 18. In v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
