9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue as well as Cross Objection. Considering the reasons advanced for delay in filing, we are satisfied that there was a reasonable cause for delay in filing. In the substantial interest of justice, we condone the delay and appeals are heard on merit. 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee has filed return of income showing total income of Rs. 18,58,555/- which included long term capital gain of Rs. 71,710/- on sale of land. The A.O. examined the return of income and details furnished and observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee has sold 27.8 acres of land situated at Dhansar for Rs. 1,45,00,000/- and another land admeasuring 28.36 acres situated at Padgha for Rs. 31,00,000/-. In the computation of capital gain, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. From the record, we found that the assessee had sold 10.88 hectares of agricultural land at village Dhansar to Shri. Deepak Harishchnadra Thakur and Rakesh R. Agarwal for the consideration of Rs. 1,45,00,000/- under sale deed dt. 15.03.2008. The possession of the said land was handed over to the purchasers on the date of the agreement itself i.e. on 15.03.2008. This fact is noted in para 6/pg no. 3 of the sale agreement dt. 15.03.2008. It is thus the case that the "transfer" of the said land as provided u/s 2(47)(v) took place on 15.03.2008 falling in the previous year relevant to A.Y. 08-09 and not in the year under appeal. The entire consideration for sale of the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, Dist. Thane. However, for certain reasons disputes arose between the parties and the transaction of sale was not completed. Subsequently, vide consent terms dt. 15.01.2008, the disputes were settled with the appellant agreeing to pay Rs. 90,00,000/- to the said Shri. Babulal Khimji Shah and in turn the said Shri. Babulal Khimji Shah giving up all his right, title and interest in the Dhansar land. Copy of the consent terms filed in High Court Bombay in respect of suit no. 608 of 1981 are placed on record. 9. The ld. A.O in the course of asst. proceedings satisfied herself about the genuineness of the said payment by way of independent verification of the IT records of Late Shri. Babulal Khimji Shah as provided by his legal heir in respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by revised return of Income and hence refused to adjudicate if transfer of land happened in AY 2008-09 and if the said land was agricultural land. However, CIT(A) allowed deduction of Rs. 90 lakhs but did not accept cost of land as of 01/04/1981 and as per valuation report of Chartered Engineering submitted by the assessee. As per our considered view, since not only sale deed was executed in the A.Y. 2008-09 but also possession was given in the A.Y. 2008-09, capital gain was liable to be taxed in the A.Y. 2008-09 and not in the A.Y. 2009-10, merely because sale deed was got registered in the A.Y. 2009-10. We also found that the same land of Rs. 1,45,00,000/- has also been assessed in AY 2008-09. It is the case of the department that sale o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
