Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (7) TMI 22 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (7) TMI 22 - ITAT MUMBAI - TMI - Sale of flat acquired by her in lieu of surrender of tenancy rights - working out the taxable gains the assessee - cost if acquistion - AO made addition of the entire amount as Long Term Capital Gain treating the cost of acquisition of the tenancy as ‘NIL’ - Held that:- In the case of Atul G.Purnaik vs. ITO (2011 (5) TMI 576 - ITAT, Mumbai ) the assessee was allotted a plot of land to the assessee as compensation in lieu of agricultural land acquired by 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

hri. H.P. Mahajani ORDER PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM The present appeal filed by the revenue is directed against order dated 24/12/2012 passed by the CIT (Appeals)-36, Mumbai pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in response to notice issued under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) the assessee filed her return of income for the A.Y. 2008-09 declaring the total income of ₹ 2,13,37,720/- During the relevant financial year, The ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntire amount of ₹ 1,01,00,000/- as Long Term Capital Gain treating the cost of acquisition of the tenancy as NIL and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹ 3,14,37,720/-as against the returned income of ₹ 2,13,37,720/-. 3. Being aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai on the ground that the Ld. Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the total income of the appellant at ₹ 3,14,37,720/- .The ld. CIT(A) after heari .....

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 of asset acquired(leasehold rights) in lieu of the original surrendered asset would be computed by reducing from the sale consideration the fair market value of the plot acquired by the assessee on surrender of original assets. 4. Dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The revenue has challenged the impugned order on following effective grounds:- (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) erred in d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting addition made by the A.O under the head Long Term Capital Gain by admitting additional evidence regarding cost of acquisition at ₹ 54,72,000/- without giving opportunity to the A.O as per Rule 46A of the I.T.Rules . 5. Before us the Ld. DR heavily relying upon the assessment order submitted that since the assessee has failed to prove the cost of acquisition of the flat in question, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

herefore, the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. 6. On the other hand the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by the AO in the light of the decision rendered by the Mumbai Bench of ITAT in the case of Shri. G. Atul Puronik vs. ITO, ITA No. 3051/M/2010 and law laid down by the Hon ble jurisdictional High court in Nila Products Ltd. 148 ITR 99 and Shiribai Pundole 129 ITR 448(Bom). The assessee was a tenant in flat No. .....

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, the assessee became owner of the saiod flat. The assessee has rightly calculated the cost of acquisition of the flat at ₹ 54,72,000/- as on 30/10/1993, i.e., the date when she got possession of the flat. Hence the impugned order does not suffer from any legal infirmity. Therefore, the appeal filed by the revenue has no merit. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record including the cases referred by the parties in support of their contentions. In the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

co-ordinate Bench of the Mumbai Tribunal has decided the similar issue in the case of Shri Ramesh Abaji Walavalkar vs. ACIT ITA Nos. 852/Mum/2009 & 1534/Mum/2010 for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2003-04 respectively. The operative part of the order reads as under:- We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. It is observed that the cost of acquisition of Sanpada land was taken by the assessee at ₹ 1,07,90,000/- being 83% of the m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) wherein a similar plot of land was allotted to the assessee as compensation in lieu of agricultural land acquired by the Government under the same scheme called 12.5% scheme and the issue was determination of cost of acquisition of the said plot of land for the purpose of computing capital gains. In this regard, the Tribunal noted that the market value of the plot of land as on the date of allotment is to be considered as full value of consideration at the time of computing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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