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 →

Income Tax Officer, Ward 41 (4) , New Delhi Versus Sh. Tapash Kumar Chaterjee

2015 (5) TMI 719 - ITAT DELHI

Capital gain - CIT(A) deleting addition on account of capital Gain claimed as exempt which was never disclosed to the Department and treating revised computation of assessment proceedings after detecting the same by Department as revised return - CIT(A) observed that the case is righty covered u/s. 49(1) and cost of acquisition which is indexed is taken to be cost to the previous owner - Held that:- Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances and precedents, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has passed .....

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 1.4.2008 should be deemed as acceptable. He observed that gift from mother is fully substantiated as copies of her income tax returns of last and relevant year alongwith document evidence of source is rightly produced. Ld. CIT(A) further noted that the cash withdrawn from the bank is evidenced by the Bank statement. We find considerable cogency in the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that gift from mother-in-law does not seem very excessive. Considering she owns a agricultural land as is substantiate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

above, we do not find any violation on the part of the Ld. CIT(A) under Rule 46A. In the background of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order on the issue in dispute, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the same by rejecting the ground no. 3 raised by the Revenue..- Decided in favour of assesse - I.T.A. No. 5036/DEL/2013 - Dated:- 12-5-2015 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU AND SHRI J.S. REDDY, JJ. For the Appellant : Sh. J. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eating revised computation of assessment proceedings after detecting the same by Department as revised return. 2. Deleting of additions of ₹ 10,25,000/- made on account of unexplained cash deposit. 3. Accepting additional evidence without granting extension of time to AO for submission of report called for which is in contravention of Rule 46A. The appellant craves the right to alter, amend, add or substitute the grounds of appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Return declari .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sold one plot of land and booked a flat claiming full exemption on account of capital gain. Assessee has not disclosed it in his return of income tax. The assessee was asked to file copies of purchase and sale deeds of properties, details of banks and entries from where transactions took place, share of ownership of assessee and his wife, date of payments to builder and matching entries in bank statements, receipts copies from builder and statement of affairs to ascertain the genuineness of the .....

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 assessee is either hiding another bank accounts or not filing the true and correct position regarding sales and purchase. AO further observed that the assesssee could not prove the nexus between sale of property and investment of those fund within the time limit prescribed to claim exemption u/s. 54F. AO asked the assessee to provide the possession letter / electricity / water bill of the property as under section 54F of the I.T. Act. As per AO the completion of construction should be comple .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sale deed of plot, therefore, it was not possible to know other detail such as history of plot. In view of above, AO completed the assessment by making various additions u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.12.2014. 3. Being aggrieved with the assessment order dated 28.12.2014, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dated 3.6.2013 has partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee. 4. Now the Revenue is aggrieved against the impugned order and filed the present appeal .....

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 revised computation which was filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings after detecting the same by Department as revised return. We find that Ld. First Appellate Authority has concluded that the addition of ₹ 26,85,470/- on account of capital gains is not justified and is excessive. Ld. CIT(A) has observed that total gain computation was as under:- Sale consideration ₹ 41,76,000 Less: Indexed cost of acquisition ₹ 13,59,081 ₹ 28,16,919 Less: E .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is indexed is taken to be cost to the previous owner. 6.3 The assessee had made the total payment within the time frame u/s. 54F of and therefore, transfer should be deemed to have taken place. The exemption u/s. 54F is allowable in the light of the following judgments : - CIT vs. Sardarmal Kothari [2008] 302 ITR 286 (Mad.) - CIT vs. Sambandam Udaykumar (2012) 81 CCH 151 Kar. HC - Commissioner of Income Tax vs. RL Sood. Held that merely because the builder failed to hand over possession of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 10,25,000/- made on account of unexplained cash deposit is concerned, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the opening cash as on 1.4.2008 should be deemed as acceptable. He observed that gift from mother is fully substantiated as copies of her income tax returns of last and relevant year alongwith document evidence of source is rightly produced. Ld. CIT(A) further noted that the cash withdrawn from the bank is evidenced by the Bank statement. We find considerable cogency in the finding .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the same by dismissing the ground no. 2 raised by the Revenue. 8. With regard to ground no. 3 regarding accepting additional evidence without granting extension of time to AO for submission of the Remand Report, which is in contravention of Rule 46A is concerned, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has called the Remand Report from the ITO, Ward 41(4), Delhi vide his office letter dated 26.2.2013, but till the date of appellate order i.e. 3.6.2013, the AO .....

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