TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... naging Director [1984 (10) TMI 35 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court] considered the scope of full value of consideration in a case and held that capital gain had to be computed by taking into account only the amount which was actually received by assessee. In that case, assessee owns 4.27 gts of land, had entered into an agreement to sell the land at ₹ 25,000 per acre. Subsequent to that, the land was acquired by Government and only an amount of ₹ 2,20,220 was received by assessee. As assessee has entered into agreement, assessee paid an amount of ₹ 1,05,220 immediately on receipt of compensation to the agreement holder and offered the balance amount of ₹ 1,20,000 as capital gain. Considering the facts of the case and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts: (i) Infrastructure expenditure ₹ 24 lakhs (ii) Corpus Fund ₹ 06 lakhs (iii) Amount payable to builder towards Wood quality difference 24 x. ₹ 5500 Rs.1,32,000 Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the above amounts are not allowable as an expenditure under section 48 of the Act and disallowed the same referring to the said section. 3. Before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee submitted that as per the agreement entered between the assessee-land owner and M/s. SMR Builders P. Ltd., assessee is required to pay corpus fund, infrastructure fund and diff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us blocks as mentioned block wise. . .. Agreed cost of infrastructure per flat ₹ 1,00,000 Corpus fund per flat ₹ 25,000/- Extra cost for teak wood ₹ 6,000/- per flat 4.4. As per the obligation, the appellant had fulfilled the reimbursement of infrastructure of ₹ 24,00,000/-, corpus fund of ₹ 6,00,000/- and wood quality difference of ₹ 1,32,000/-, totaling to ₹ 31,32,000/- out of the full value of consideration received by him. This payment of ₹ 31,32,000/- is also evidenced by a confirmation letter submitted by the SMR Builders Pvt. Ltd., dated 30.10.20125 in which it was clearly mentioned that the appellant has paid an amount of ₹ 73,73, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, assessee owns 4.27 gts of land, had entered into an agreement to sell the land at ₹ 25,000 per acre. Subsequent to that, the land was acquired by Government and only an amount of ₹ 2,20,220 was received by assessee. As assessee has entered into agreement, assessee paid an amount of ₹ 1,05,220 immediately on receipt of compensation to the agreement holder and offered the balance amount of ₹ 1,20,000 as capital gain. Considering the facts of the case and the fact that there is a legal right in the compensation amount, Hon ble High Court held that this is a case of diversion of income by overriding title. Since, in assessee s case also there is contractual right in paying amounts, we confirm the order of Ld. CIT(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
