TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o-owners have received the entire consideration before 31.3.2008. Hence, we agree with the contentions of the assessee that the impugned property has been transferred during the year relevant to the assessment year 2008-09 and hence AO was not justified in assessing the same in AY 2009-10. As A.R submitted that the registration of deed on 1.7.2008 was only a formality and upon the registration of the deed, the conveyance would date back to the date of execution of the deed we find support to the contentions of the assessee in the decision rendered in the case of M. Shyamala Rao [ 1998 (4) TMI 113 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] as observed that the registration of the conveyance deed relates back to the date on which the agreement for sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2014 - - - Dated:- 2-9-2015 - S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND LALIT KUMAR, JM For the Appellant : Shri Nishit Gandhi For the Rspondent : Shri Airiju Jaikaran ORDER Per B.R.BASKARAN: The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 3.3.2014 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-25, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The assessee is agitating the assessment of Long Term Capital Gain of ₹ 6 lakhs in his hands. 3. We heard the parties and perused the record. The facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The AO received information that the assessee has sold an immovable property for a sum of ₹ 31 lakhs on 1.7.2008. When enquired about the same it was noticed that the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistered under the Registration Act belatedly on 1.7.2008, it will date back to the date of execution of conveyance deed, i.e., 31.3.2008. The ld. Counsel also submitted the capital gain, if any, is not assessable in his individual hands, since the assessee has received only his share from the HUF. Alternatively, the ld. Counsel submitted that the capital gain should be computed by adopting the market value as on 1.4.1981 on the basis of valuation report furnished by the assessee. He submitted that there is no basis with the ld. CIT(A) for estimating the market value as on 1.4.1981 as ₹ 1 lakh. 5. On the contrary, the ld. DR submitted that the assessee has not declared capital gain in the hands of HUF and hence the assessee should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 ITR 140)(AP), wherein the Hon ble High Court observed that the registration of the conveyance deed relates back to the date on which the agreement for sale was executed in favour of the buyer by the owner. In view of the above, the capital gain, if any, is assessable in AY 2008-09 only. 7. The next question is whether the capital gain can be assessed in the hands of the assessee herein in his individual capacity. We notice that the assessee has contended before the AO that the property belongs to the HUF and what he has received is only a share from the HUF. However, we notice that the tax authorities have rejected the claim on the reasoning that the HUF has not filed return of income and hence the capital gain should be assessed in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
