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 →

Shri Sanat Roy Chowdhury, C/o V.N. Purohit and Co. Versus J.C.I.T., Range-2, (Hooghly) , Chinshura, Hooghly

2017 (3) TMI 252 - ITAT KOLKATA

Assessee offered capital gain from Sale of land and not from building - joint property - assessee submitted that he is the owner of the land and not of the building. The entire investment in the construction of the building was made only by other person - Held that:- On examination of the order of lower authorities we find that the argument of the assessee that he has no connection with the building either directly or indirectly has not been adjudicated in the absence of documentary evidence. Ho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ght of above is stated discussion. - Decided n favor of assessee for statistical purposes. - I .T.A. No.918/Kol /2015 - Dated:- 3-3-2017 - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For The Appellant : Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT ORDER Per Waseem Ahmed, AM This appeal by the assessee is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata dated 23.03.2015. Assessment was framed by J.C.I.T., Ran .....

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 one of the joint owner in the properties located at 11/10A & 10B, S.C. Chatterjee Street, Konnagar Hooghly. The share in the property was sold by the assessee along with the other owners for ₹ 16,50,000.00 which was registered at the office of ADSR, Serampore vide entry in the book number-I, CD volume No. 2 pages from 2337 to 2357 being Deed No. 00938 dated 15-2-2008 as detailed below : S.No. Names of the owners Share in the property Sale proceeds 1. Sanat Roy Chowdhury (Assessee) 8. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sers of the impugned property has committed fraud on the Government Revenue therefore FIR was filed by additional district sub registrar against all the persons. Finally the property was valued for the stamp duty purpose at ₹ 2,59,35,020.00 by the registering authority. Accordingly the AO called upon assessee to put forth his submission if any with regard to the valuation of the impugned property. In compliance there to the assessee submitted that he is the owner of the land and not 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 parties to dupe the Revenue. The registry was made in favour of purchasers for the entire building and there was no separate registration deed for the land alone. Accordingly the AO worked out the share of the assessee in the sale consideration for ₹ 22,25,225.00 being 8.58% on ₹ 2,59,35,020.00. 4. Assessee preferred an appeal to learned CIT-A. The assessee before the learned CIT-A submitted that all the Sellers of the impugned property belong to a family being brothers and mothe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

under : 4.5 Assessee and his family members in connivance with each other had tried to defraud the State Government from the legitimate stamp duty. as well as LT. Department by not explaining the source of investment, as well as not paying legitimate tax. After being caught by the Registering Authority regarding non-disclosure of the building on land, while registering the assessee and his family members have come up with the plea of nominal investment by one family member (Samar Roy Chowdhury), .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ownership of land, if no evidence to the contrary is produced. This is the share of property sold which has been accepted by A.O. while computing capital gains. In view of the above facts which has clearly been brought out by A.O. in his order which clearly points out to under valuation, to avoid payment of tax under the head Capital Gains, A.O.'s determination of income under the head capital gains under section 50C is accepted. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of learned CIT-A assessee is .....

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 placed on pages 22 to 29 of the paper book. The learned AR before us prayed to restore the matter to the file of AO for fresh adjudication as many aspects of the case have not been considered by the lower authorities. On the contrary the learned AR raised no objection if the matter is leased order to the AO. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates to the sale of land but the lower authorities have held that 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

 

 

 

 

 

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