TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 593X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, we are admitting the evidences as well as the additional ground filed by the assessee and the entire matter is restored back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration and adjudication of Long-term-capital-gain after giving due and effective opportunity to the assessee to present his case. Thus, we remand back the entire issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No. : 4685/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 8-9-2016 - ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals)-I, Mumbai dated 26.02.2016 for the assessment year 2011-12 on the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The learned Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ITAT Rules. In addition, the assessee has also filed additional grounds of appeal. In the said petition, the assessee has given detail reasons as to why the additional evidences could not be filed along with the other documents, which for the sake of ready reference are reproduced herein below:- I come from a very conservative Fisherman community. In all seven Plots of Land were owned by my family in Mulund West. All the dealings till the death of my Father, were done by my eldest uncle, Mr. Gopinath Mahadev Koli and my father and we i.e. my Mother, my brothers and my sisters along with me used to blindly sign the paper in front of us. Thus till 2007 (date of death 25.03.2007), I had no say in any of the land Dealings. As a resul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,079.00 32,900 B 3 7594 1,60,40,000 14,53,85,500 4,509.90 32,237 C 4 6330 48,60,000 4,89,01,000 1651.50 29,610 D 5 6702 6,26,50,000 17,42,88,000 6,561.00 26,528 E Total 8,45,72,000 42,74,33,000 14,511.40 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 2 (Part), CTS No. 702 (Part) and Plot of Land admeasuring 5,633 Sq. Mtrs. at Survey No. 101 Hissa No. 2 (part), CTS No. 702 (part). (Refer point no. 6 on Page No. 349, point no. 10 page no. 351 and point no. 13 on page No. 349, 355 and 356 of Annexure G .) 5. Due to dispute between M/s. Vijay Enterprises and us, in the year 1992 we cancelled the Power of Attorney issued in favour of M/s. Vijay Enterprises (Refer page no. 359 point no. 17 of Annexure G ) 6. We sold the Plots of land at S.No. 101 to M/s. Shreenath Builder, by entering five different agreements, by each of seven sub families. (Photo copies attached herewith as Annexure H to L from page no. 428 to 501.) 7. All the agreements were dated 22.12.1992. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dant no. 29 . Page No. 425 of Annexure G reads as I am of the opinion that the defendant no. 29 i.e M/s. Shreenath Builders being in possession of the said land under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act is entitled to be continued in possession . Page No. 525 of Annexure M reads as We also find that the defendant No. 29 has proved execution of possession receipt in his favour. 12. The order of the single bench was subsequently reconfirmed by the double Bench of Bombay High Court on 20,04,2010. Refer Annexure M from page no. 502 to 532 . 5. The Ld. AR submitted that, in the impugned case, these additional evidences go to the very root of the issue involved and will huge effect on the disputed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
