9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the "Act") in the assessment year under consideration. 3. Briefly stated facts are that in the instant case the assessee has filed her return of income on 04.04.2014 showing total income of Rs. 5,15,770/-. Later the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 03.09.2015 and served on the assessee. Subsequently, notice u/s. 142(1) was also issued on 03.09.2015. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee purchased a flat of super built up area of 2800 sq. ft. along with 135 sq. ft. garage from M/s. Eureka Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd. by a deed of conveyance dated 28.03.2013. The assessee claimed to have purchased the said flat for a consideration of Rs. 30,00,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to force from AY 2014-15 i.e. with effect from 01.04.2014 and hence was not applicable to the assessment year under consideration i.e. AY 2013-14. Therefore, the assessee submitted that no addition could be made applying this provision of law. After considering the detailed submission of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 1,69,81,700/- by observing as under: "4.........I find that the appellant entered into a registered deed of conveyance dated 26-03- 2013 with Ms Euraka Mercantiles Private Limited (aka Ritrnan Mercantiles Pvt Ltd) and the appellant had purchased flat no 4A at premises no 21 Chakraberia Road (S) for a consideration of Rs. 29,50,000 along with a parking for Rs. 50,000 thus the total consideration as d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... commercial decision of the Vendor and the AO could not question the same. There is a mark difference on credit sale and transfer without consideration i.e. Gift. Sale of credit is a very normal business practise and has been prevalent for centuries. The AO was not justified in holding that the transfer was without consideration. I hold that the transfer of the flat and car park was for consideration of Rs. 30,00,000. In view of the above finding that the sale of the flat was for consideration, the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the IT Act 1961 was not applicable to the facts of the case. The said section was applicable in case of sale of flat without consideration and in this case the sale was for consideration of Rs. 30,00,000. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ICICI Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank as follows: Payment reference Payment date Payment amount ICICI Bank Chq. No.731240, 21.05.14 23.05.2014 Rs. 2,00,000 Kotak Mahindra Bank RTGS: KKBKR52016051000729414 KKBKR52016051300867021 KKBKH516137630261 KKBKR52016051700686338 10.05.2016 13.05.2016 16.05.2016 17.05.2016 Rs. 5,00,000 Rs. 5,00,000 Rs..7,00,000 Rs. 11,00,000 Rs. Total Rs. .30,00,000 6. We also note that the assessee had also filed the following documents to corroborate the fact of payment of the consideration to the vendor. Documents Annexure Page No. Ledger accounts of the assessee in the books of Seller showing receipt of subsequent payment D 21-22 Bank statements (ICICI Bank & Kotak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty and the consideration, shall be chargeable to tax in the hands of the individual or HUF as income from other sources. 14.3 Considering the fact that there may be a time gap between the date of agreement and the date of registration, it has been provided that where the date of the agreement fixing the amount of consideration for the transfer of the immovable property and the date of registration are not the same, the stamp duty value may be taken as on the date of the agreement, instead of that on the date of registration. This exception shall, however, apply only in a case where the amount of consideration, or a part thereof, has been paid by Page 27 of 56 any mode other than cash on or before the date of the agreement fixing the amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
