Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)

2015 (4) TMI 438 - ITAT BANGALORE

Disallowance u/s.14A - Held that:- The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. V CIT [2011 (11) TMI 267 - Delhi High Court] has held that by virtue of the provisions of sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 14A of the Act, if the Assessing Officer is not satisfied by the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of such expenditure or no expenditure, as the case may be, cannot embark upon the determination of the amount of expenditure in accordance with Rule 8D .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee that it has incurred no expenditure to earn the exempt income of ₹ 18,400 but has proceeded to apply the provisions of Rule 8D to arrive at the disallowance of ₹ 1,93,730 as the expenditure deemed to be incurred for earning exempt income. Further, as contended by the learned Authorised Representative, the judicial pronouncements relied on by the assessee i.e. J.M. Financial Ltd (2014 (4) TMI 752 - ITAT MUMBAI), apply to the factual matrix of the case on hand and in this view of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ka Breweries & Distilleries Ltd. ('KBDL') - Held that:- It has been submitted by the assessee that the impugned addition of ₹ 5,87,817 can be made only if the liability claimed by the assessee is higher than the dues shown by the creditor viz. KBDL. In the case on hand, the undisputed facts as per record show that the liability claimed by the assessee is ₹ 3,65,92,256, whereas on examination of the books of KBDL by the Assessing Officer, it was found that the assessee was sho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the matter. This proposition has been upheld in the case of Anjum H Ghaswala (2001 (10) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court) and we, therefore, uphold the action of the Assessing Officer in charging the said interest. - Decided against assessee.

Income from 'Prestige Shantiniketan' Project - CIT (Appeals) deleted the addition and upheld the basic contention of the assessee that the property, which is the subject matter of JDA between the assessee and PEPL, is held as stock-in-trade by t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng to this effect, rendered by a co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2005-06 [2015 (4) TMI 465 - ITAT BANGALORE]. No sale of such stock-in-trade has been reported to have taken place during the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2009-10. The assessee has reportedly been consistently following the completed contract method of accounting and the same appears to have accepted by revenue. AO has not brought on record any material evidence .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ompletion method of accounting merely because PEPL, the developer in the JDA, in following the said method.In the light of the above facts, it would be incorrect to conclude that the assessee has earned any income out of the JDA in the period relevant to the impugned assessment year 2009-10.

As decided in case of R.Gopinath (HUF) V CIT [2009 (7) TMI 1209 - ITAT CHENNAI] when an immovable property is held as stock-in- trade, the same is to be considered as sold only when the sale is co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

so transferred. 11.6.4 In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above and the observations made and findings rendered by us, we see no reason for interfering with the findings rendered by the learned CIT(A) in the impugned order deleting the addition as income from the Shantiniketan Project in the year under consideration - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A. No.52/Bang/2013, S.P. No.148/Bang/2014, I.T.A.No.125/Bang/2013 - Dated:- 27-3-2015 - Shri Rajpal Yadav And Shri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the business of property development, being the land owner, also derives rental income from various properties. For Assessment Year 2009-10, the assessee filed its return of income on 29.9.2009 declaring income of ₹ 4,41,18,220. The return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and the case was subsequently selected for scrutiny. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.21.12.2011 wherein t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

learned CIT (Appeals) disposed off the assessee's appeal by the impugned order dt.22.10.2012 allowing the assessee partial relief. In this order, learned CIT (Appeals) deleted the addition of ₹ 29,55,92,202 made in respect of the income of the Shantiniketan Project; deleted the addition made under Section 41(1) of the Act to the extent of ₹ 32,19,299; sustaining the remaining portion of ₹ 5,87,817 under Section 41(1) of the Act and also sustained the entire addition of  .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ds :- "1. The order of the authorities below in so far as it is against the appellant, is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The authorities below are not justified in adding a sum of ₹ 1,93,730 under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules since the mandatory conditions for invoking the said provisions has not been complied with as the Assessing Officer has not recorded satisfaction .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rities below failed to appreciate that the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act are not applicable to the facts of the case of the appellant as there is no remission or abatement of the liability. 7. The authorities below are not justified in adding a sum of ₹ 5,87,817 on account of difference in account balances with M/s. KBD Sugars & Distilleries Ltd under the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. The authorities below failed to appreciate the fact that when M/s. KBD Sugars & .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rest is not in accordance with section 234B of the Act. 10. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete, modify any of the grounds which are urged above. 11. For the above and such other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing the appellant prays your Honour to consider the facts and circumstances of the case and justice be rendered." 5. The grounds at S.Nos.1, 10 & 11 of the assessee's appeal are general in nature and not being urged before us are dismissed as infructuo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

indirectly utilized the services of man power, office, etc to earn such income. The Assessing Officer invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the IT Rules disallowed an amount of ₹ 1,93,730. 6.2 On appeal, the assessee challenged the disallowance of ₹ 1,93,730 made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii) on three counts. Viz., (i) that the Assessing Officer has invoked section 14A of the Act in a manner contrary to the provisions of la .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the case of - (i) Technopark Advises (P) Ltd., 18Taxman.com 146 (Del), and (ii) Cheminvest 121 ITD 318 (Del)(SB), he confirmed the entire disallowance of ₹ 1,93,730. 6.3.1 In the proceedings before us, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the Assessing Officer has not rendered any correct or cogent reasons for rejecting the assessee's contention that it has not incurred any expenditure to earn the exempt income of ₹ 18,400 and has proceeded to mechanically apply t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch investments as appear in the books of account of the assessee. It is submitted that the break-up of the investments in shares are as under :- In associate companies 38,70,000 equity shares in Trichy Steel Rolling Mills P. Ltd. : ₹ 3,87,00,000. In other companies 4600 equity shares of Andhra Bank : ₹ 46,000. 6.3.3 The learned Authorised Representative submits that, from the above break up of investments, it is clear that out of the total amount of ₹ 3,87,46,000, the assessee& .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3.87 Crores in Trichy Steel Rolling Mills, ₹ 1,87,00,000 was invested in the financial year ending 31st March, 2001 and the balance ₹ 2.00 Crores was invested in the financial year ending 31st March, 2003. It is contended by the learned Authorised Representative that these investments are long term investments, which form a part of the record before the IT Department and that no expenditure has been incurred to either maintain or monitor these investments. It is submitted that the as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

income of ₹ 18,400. 6.3.4 In this context, the learned Authorised Representative placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of J.M. Financial Ltd. V Addl. CIT in ITA No.4521/Mum/2012 dt.26.3.2014. The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in this order the Tribunal has held that where the investment is made in sister / associate concerns, it is so made for the purpose of having control or for business purposes and not with a view to earn .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ropes Ltd. V Addl. CIT in ITA No.5408/Mum/2012. The learned Authorised Representative prays that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the judicial pronouncements on this issue on similar facts, the addition of ₹ 1,93,730 made under Section 14A rws Rule 8D ought to be deleted. 6.3.5 The learned Authorised Representative alternatively placed reliance on the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Daga Global Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. V ACIT in ITA No.5592/Mum/2012 where .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.5.1 We have heard the rival contentions and have perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncements placed reliance upon by the assessee. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. V CIT reported in 347 ITR 272 has held that by virtue of the provisions of sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 14A of the Act, if the Assessing Officer is not satisfied by the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of such expenditur .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d that the Assessing Officer has not given any cogent reason in the order of assessment for disbelieving the contention of the assessee that it has incurred no expenditure to earn the exempt income of ₹ 18,400 but has proceeded to apply the provisions of Rule 8D to arrive at the disallowance of ₹ 1,93,730 as the expenditure deemed to be incurred for earning exempt income. 6.5.2 Further, as contended by the learned Authorised Representative, the judicial pronouncements relied on by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, we delete the disallowance of ₹ 1,93,730 made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D. 7. Ground Nos. 6 to 8 : Addition u/s.41(1) of the Act. 7.1 These grounds are raised in respect of the addition made under Section 41(1) of the Act in respect of the difference in liability towards Karnataka Breweries & Distilleries Ltd. ('KBDL'). 7.2 The facts of the matter, briefly, are that in the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noticed that in the b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty and brought the same to tax in the assessee's hands under Section 41(1) of the Act. On appeal, the learned CIT (Appeals) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 7.3 The learned Authorised Representative submitted that the addition of ₹ 5,87,817 made cannot be sustained on basic accounting principles considering the fact that the liability admitted by the assessee at ₹ 3,65,92,256 is less than the dues of ₹ 3,71,80,073 shown by its creditor, KBDL. It is cont .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee has shown a lesser liability than the amount shown as due by its creditor, the basic requirement that a liability no longer exists is not present in the facts of this case in order to apply the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act. 7.4 The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below and prayed for the assessee's appeal on this issue to be rejected as the orders of the authorities below were factually indisputable. 7.5.1 We have heard the rival conte .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and cessation of liability under Section 41(1) of the Act and brought the same to tax in the assessee's hands. On appeal, during remand proceedings, the assessee submitted that the difference appearing in this account was offered to tax by KBDL in the year ended 31.3.2008. The learned CIT (Appeals), observing that in respect of the discrepancy of ₹ 5,87,817, no proof was produced by the assessee to establish that this amount was offered to tax by KBDL, sustained this addition as cessa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Assessing Officer, it was found that the assessee was shown to be liable to pay KBDL ₹ 3,71,80,073. We find that it is in these factual circumstances the finding of the authorities below is erroneous as the basic requirement that a liability no longer exists is not present in the case on hand to warrant the application of the provision of section 41(1) of the Act. In this being the factual matrix of the case, we delete the addition of ₹ 5,87,817 made under Section 41(1) of the Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the said interest. The Assessing Officer is, however, directed to recompute the interest chargeable u/s. 234B of the Act, if any, while giving effect to this order. 9. In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is partly allowed. Revenue's appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 in ITA No.125/Bang/2013. 10. In its appeal revenue has raised the following grounds :- " Ground No.1. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred on fact and in law n holding that no income is chargeab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted that the capital gains will arise only in the assessment year 2005-06 since the transfer took place during the year on the basis of execution of JDA by the appellant company and further execution of Power of Attorney on 5.2.2005 and 1.3.2005 in favour of M/s. PEPL for transfer of stock for development and finally the CIT (Appeals) is directing the Assessing Officer to take necessary remedial action to tax the capital gains in the appellant's case in the year in which the stock is sold an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

td. ('PEPL') by agreement dt.5.2.2005, in the period relevant to Assessment Year 2005-06 and the project was named 'Prestige Shantiniketan'. 11.2.1 In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer after examining the JDA dt.5.2.2005 came to the conclusion that the assessee has transferred stock-in-trade to PEPL and is therefore liable to pay tax arising out of the said transaction. In coming to this conclusion, the Assessing Officer had drawn support from the follow .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the assessee company has obtained approval from their share holders to enter into the JDA with PEPL and to execute the necessary documents in connection with the same; (iii) As per page 11 of the JDA, the assessee has handed over possession of the property to PEPL till the completion of the development and construction of the project on the property; (iv) As per page 19 of the JDA, the assessee company has agreed to transfer / relinquish / sell 68.23% of the undivided portion of stock of land .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ome on the Percentage Completion Method holding that the assessee was not correct in following the Project Completion Method as it was maintaining its books of account on the Mercantile System of Accounting and not the cash system and that the assessee ought to have recognized and admitted its income in accordance with Accounting Standards - 7. The Assessing Officer contends that when both the assessee and PEPL have held common stock of land on which construction activity has been simultaneously .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Percentage Completion Method, the same is also applicable to the assessee and it should offer its income on this basis. The Assessing Officer on the basis of advances collected from customers, on behalf of the assessee by PEPL and the non-refundable deposit paid by the PEPL to the assessee, arrived at a sale consideration of ₹ 260,09,86,890. Applying the Percentage Completion Method thereon, the Assessing Officer arrived at the Gross Income of ₹ 46,81,77,640 and after deducting co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of the capital asset to stock-in-trade, as well as business income arising on the sale of such stock-in-trade will accrue and arise only in the year in which the stock-in-trade is actually sold. 11.3.2 At para 5.9 of the impugned order, the learned CIT (Appeals) has held that it is an undisputed fact that the assessee was holding the land as stock-in-trade after converting the capital asset and the same was disclosed in the assessee's Balance Sheet and that this fact has also been admitted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

et as defined in Section 2(14) of the Act specifically excludes stock-in-trade. It is also observed that the conversion of a Capital Asset into stock-in-trade amounts to transfer under Section 2(47)(iv) and that transfer of a business asset is not defined under the Act. The learned CIT(A) has observed that the Assessing Officer is of the opinion that in view of the fact that the assessee has entered into a JDA with PEPL and also executed a POA in their favour in the period relevant to Assessment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder to pass on the title to the purchaser or developer in as much as section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act applies only to those immovable properties which are held as Capital Assets as provided under Section 2(47) of the Act and not to those held by way of stock-in-trade. In both paras 5.15 and 5.17 of the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) has held that since no stock (land/flats or apartments) are sold in the impugned Assessment Year 2009-10, no Capital Gains or Business Profits would a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n-trade, by the assessee in the impugned Assessment Year 2009-10 in order to warrant estimation of income by rejection of books of account. The learned CIT(A), in the impugned order, however directed the Assessing Officer to take necessary remedial action to tax the capital gains in the assessee's case in the year in which the stock of land was sold or transferred by the assessee in accordance with the provisions of section 45(2) of the Act and also to tax the business profits in the year(s) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

EPL, in the immovable property in the Assessment Year 2005-06 and that the assessee's claim of conversion of the Capital Asset into stock-in-trade is factually incorrect and is merely a cover up to avoid payment of tax for Assessment Year 2005-06. The learned Departmental Representative also placed reliance upon written submissions dt.10.11.2014 which is common to the appeal for Assessment Year 2005-06 and the impugned Assessment Year 2009-10. Therein, Revenue has contended that in the balan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fore the JDA was entered into with PEPL on 5.2.2005 is not correct. The learned Departmental Representative supported the findings rendered by the Assessing Officer in the order of assessment and prayed for the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) on this point to be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer to be restored. 11.5.1 The written submissions put forth by the learned Authorised Representative on this issue regarding the findings rendered by the Assessing Officer in the order of asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

strued as delivery of possession under section 53 A of the Transfer of Property Act read with section 2(47) (v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The legal possession of Schedule 'D' Party shall continue to vest in the First Party. The Second Party shall only be permitted to enter upon the Schedule 'D' Property by way of license to develop the same. iii. The JDA is a contract between the Assessee and PEPL and the covenants contained therein should be read & understood in the manne .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mp; develop the Schedule Property is for the limited purpose of Development & should not be construed as handing over of possession as contemplated by section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act read with section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act. v. The conclusion of the assessing officer that the Assessee has handed over possession is therefore incorrect. 8.6 TRANSFER OF LAND TO DEVELOPER: i. Clause 11.1 of the JDA (page 70 of paper book) covenants that even though the Developer has the right .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o such built up area. ii. It is clear that the Assessee shall transfer the land only after receiving its share of built up area, wherein the construction is complete in all respects & such built up area is fit for occupancy & use. It is therefore important to examine the fact as to when the developer has actually completed construction & handed over the built up areas to the owners. Certainly this cannot happen on the very day the JDA is entered into. iii. Further it is evident from .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

's constructed area in all respects even as on 24/03/2011, relevant to the A.Y.2011-12 & therefore the question of considering any income from the JDA in the hands of the Assessee upto the A.Y. 2011-12 does not arise. iv. The Assessing officer is therefore wrong in coming to the conclusion that the Assessee has transferred land to the Developer. 8.7 OBLIGATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE: i. Page 5, sub para IV of the preamble in the JDA (Page 44 of paper book) states that the Assessee has received .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aper book) stipulates that the Assessee shall complete the purchase of land from KIADB within 12 months from the date of the JDA (05/02/2005), perfect title to the same by obtaining a Sale deed for 14 acres 12 guntas of land in its favour from KIADB. The final sale deed from KIADB was obtained on 23/01/2006 & the same is evidenced by the recital to this effect in the agreement dated 24/03/2011(in page 156 of the paper book). v. Clause No.13(2) of the JDA (page 76 of paper book) stipulates th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

shall secure a sale deed in its favour from Shivakumar Reddy in respect of 7 acres 14 guntas of land within a period of 45 days from the date of the JDA (05/02/2005). vii. It is clear from the above that as on the date of JDA the Assessee had not secured conveyance of title deeds in its name in respect of 31 acres 21 guntas of land out of the total area of 94 acres 1.82 guntas committed to Joint Development. If this be the case then can it be said that the Assessee had transferred the lands whe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee has on 05/02/2005, executed a POA in favour of PEPL authorising it to represent the Assessee before all statutory authorities to secure necessary licenses & permissions to carry out the Development authorities. ii. The presence of this clause itself demonstrates that the land is in the name of the Assessee & all permissions, licenses etc are to be obtained in the name of the Assessee in order carry out development on the Schedule Property. If the land were to be transferred the que .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cted area. iv. Clause 13.6 (page 76 of paper book) states that the Assessee has executed a separate POA, on 05/02/2005, other than the ones mentioned in Clause 13.4 & 13.5 authorising the PEPL to convey sale deeds, lease deeds etc in respect of PEPL's share of the constructed area & that the said POA is kept in escrow in terms of Cl.13.9 of the JDA. v. Clause 13.9 of the JDA (page 77 of paper book) states that the POA mentioned in Clause 13.6 shall be kept in Escrow with Mr.Kusuma Mu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed to convey the undivided share for 214.76 sft of super built area).That on completion of the construction of the Owners Constructed Area, the Developer shall intimate the Owner in writing with the architect's certificate and the occupation certificate as to the said completion and if the Assessee does not take possession within 10 days of such intimation, PEPL shall be entitled to exercise its rights over the proportionate undivided interest in land that it is eligible to without waiting f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in escrow shows that PEPL cannot convey title before completing its obligation namely keeping the owners constructed area ready for delivery to the Assessee. Further the undivided interest in land which PEPL is entitled to convey is restricted to only those portions which is proportionate to the Area of Owners whose construction is complete. vii. In view of such conditions as stipulated above can it be said that the Assessee has transferred land on 05/02/2005, relevant to the A.Y. 2005- 06itself .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

anded back to the Assessee on 24/03/2011 by the Escrow, which fact is evidenced in page 15 of the said agreement of 24/03/2011(paper book page no.168) under the head "Documents of Title". 8.9 DOCUMENTS OF TITLE: i. Clause No.14 of the JDA (page 78 of paper book) specifies that the Original Documents of Title shall also be kept in Escrow with Mr.Kusuma Muniraju, Advocate having his office at Eden Park, No.20, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore and that the handing over of the same will depen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not before that. iii. Further it is evident from the Agreement entered into dated 24/03/2011, between the Assessee & PEPL that the Documents of title which is kept in Escrow is handed over by the Escrow to the Developer for the benefit of all owners only on 24/03/2011, which fact is evidenced in page 15 of the said agreement of 24/03/2011(paper book page no.168) under the head "Documents of Title". 8.10 RECEIPT OF NON REFUNDABLE DEPOSIT: i. The assessing officer also mentions the f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

andon or terminate the same, then in such an event any amount received by way of Non refundable Deposit by the Assessee is not returnable to the Developer and this partakes the nature of compensation & becomes a Capital Receipt in the hands of the Assessee. iii. In the event the Developer is able to complete the project then the Non Refundable Deposit gets converted to Sale Consideration & is to be over the entire area of land sold and will be treated as income to the extent the ownershi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sferred from the Assessee it is clear that no part of it is transferred for and upto the A.Y. 2011-12 much less on 05/02/2005 itself. 8.12 The fact that the land which is subjected to Joint Development is Stock In Trade of the Assessee is a very important fact to take note off in order to decide the exact point in time as to when the ownership in these lands held as stock in trade gets actually transferred from the Assessee. 8.13 The application of section 45 is limited to sub section (2) of sec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ctually registered in favour of PEPL or its nominees or any third person for that matter & bring to tax the Capital Gains arising out of such conveyance in such years in which it is so transferred. The sale of undivided interest in land has two components of income. The first is Income from Capital Gains which is to be worked out as per the provisions of sub section (2) of section 45 & the other component being Income from Business, which is to be computed on the basis of the value attri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the apartment to the purchasers, one can find out the value per sft of land and the value per sft of building. Both these components are to be taxed in the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the undivided interest in land is actually conveyed and to the limited extent of the land actually conveyed. 8.15 The Hon'ble Chennai Bench of the ITAT has in the case of R.Gopinath (HUF) vs ACIT, 42 DTR Tribunal Judgments 127, held that one cannot presume any intention in executing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

section 45(2) should be according to its ordinary, natural & popular sense, and it should not include a transaction referred to under sub -clause (5) of sub - section (47) of Section 2 of the IT Act, 1961 in relation to a Capital Asset are SUSTAINABLE. By no stretch of imagination, the said transaction can be termed as more or less as sale. When Legal title & possession were with the assessee, then the transfer of the same is not possible merely by allowing the developer to carry out con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e. Further the Tribunal confirmed that the sale of stock in trade is complete when title was conveyed by execution of a registered deed of conveyance. 8.16 In the present case, the facts being similar, the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of R.Gopinath (HUF) vs ACIT, 42 DTR Tribunal Judgments 127 is squarely applicable. 8.17 One another important fact that needs to be considered is the assessment order u/s 143(3) passed for the A.Y. 2007-08, in the case of the Assessee, a copy of w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see company. It stated that the income would be declared when the project is completed. Presumably the assessee is following the project completion method for recognizing the income. This method of revenue recognition has been examined in detail in A.Y. 2005-06. There the assessing officer held that since the corresponding income is not declared for taxation, the corresponding expenses should not be booked as expenditure. The expenditure should be recognised as project expenditure incurred towar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

age Completion Method. 8.19 The reasoning of the assessing officer that the Assessee has to necessarily follow the percentage completion method merely because the Developer PEPL is doing so in respect of this project is absurd, to say the least. 8.20 Further Accounting Standard 7 is not applicable to the Assessee in as much as he is not a contractor & is only a land owner who holds the land as stock in trade. 8.21 All these submissions made by the Assessee are supported by the decision of a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pleted Contract Method of Accounting. When that be the case how can this Assessee who is neither a Contractor and nor a developer but a pure land owner be compelled not to follow Completed Contract Method of Accounting & have Percentage Completion method thrust on it. 8.22 The Assessee has in fact declared the following income from the said project based on Actual Sales made: (i) For the A.Y. 2012-13, Gross Income of ₹ 61,26,29,381/- and a Net Income of ₹ 48,20,29,955/-. (ii) For .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nto stock-in- trade before entering into the JDA with PEPL, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the issue was argued before this Tribunal in the appeal for Assessment Year 2005-06 by both the assessee and the Revenue. The co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in its order in ITA No.557/Bang/2014 dt.21.11.2014 at para 21 thereof has rendered a finding of fact that the assessee had converted the lands held as Capital Assets into stock-in-trade and the same was held as stock-in-trade .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

venue's contention that the lands were never converted into stock-in-trade but was all along held as capital assets and that the ownership stood transferred to PEPL on 5.2.2005. The learned Authorised Representative contends that in these circumstances, in view of and accordance with the decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT V T.K. Dayalu 202 Taxman 531 and of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Chaturbhuj Dwarkadas Kapadia (260 ITR 491) (2001), revenue wou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he finding rendered on this issue in the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is in order and therefore, the ground raised by revenue on this issue ought to be dismissed. 11.6.1 We have heard the rival submissions of both parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record. We have also perused the decision rendered by a co- ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2005-06 in ITA No.557/Bang/2014. From the material on record the following .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment Year 2005-06, the point in time when the tax will arise is only in the year in which the stock-in-trade is sold; iii) No sale of such stock-in-trade has been reported to have taken place during the year under consideration i.e. Assessment Year 2009-10; iv) The assessee has reportedly been consistently following the completed contract method of accounting and the same appears to have accepted by revenue; v) The Assessing Officer has not brought on record any material evidence to demonstrate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

method of accounting merely because PEPL, the developer in the JDA, in following the said method. In the light of the above facts, it would be incorrect to conclude that the assessee has earned any income out of the JDA in the period relevant to the impugned assessment year 2009-10. 11.6.2 On a careful perusal, we find that the judicial pronouncement rendered by the Chennai Bench of the ITAT in the case of R.Gopinath (HUF) V CIT in ITA Nos.29 & 30/Mad/2008 dt.24.7.2009 and relied on by the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version