9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 1235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 50 (C) are applicable. (ii) Because the CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming LTCG at Rs. 5,59,445. (iii) Because the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 10,000 as other Income. (iv) Because the order appealed against is contrary to law, facts and principles of natural justice." 3. Ground nos. 1 & 2 are regarding the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act in respect of sale of land by four co-owners. The assessee sold immovable property for a total consideration of Rs. 19,50,000/-. The property was valued for the purpose of stamp duty at Rs. 53,00,000/- During the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer invoke the provisions of Section 50C a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and submitted that as per Section 4 the owner of the land is the State Government and Bhumidari Right is only tenancy right. Therefore, the Bhumidar is only a tenant and not an owner of the land. He has then, referred to the decision of the Kolkata Benches of the Tribunal Dt. 27th Feb, 2012 in case of CIT Vs. Tejinder Singh in ITA No. 1459/Kol./2011 and C.O. No. 62/Kol/2011 and submitted that the Tribunal held that as in case of transfer of lease holdland the provisions of Section 50C are not applicable .The Tribunal observed that what is transferred by the assessee is the tenancy rights and not land or building or both. Therefore, the provisions of Section 50C are not applicable. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that what is sol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is no dispute that if the land is a leasehold land and the assessee is not having the absolute ownership but only having the right to use the land for specific purpose then transfer of such a right in the land would amount to transfer of tenancy right and not the ownership. However, in the case in hand as per the sale deed dt. 26th May 2004 the parties have specifically stated that the land in question is free from any encumbrance and does not fall in the category of ceiling, nazul or leasehold. Therefore, what is transferred by the assessees as per sale deed dt. 26th May 2004 is the ownership of the land for a consideration of Rs. 9,50,000/- whereas the land was valued for stamp duty purpose at Rs. 53,00,000/-. Neither the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the adoption of rate @ Rs. 45 per sq. Yard Instead of FMV as on 1.4.81 @ Rs. 74 per sq. yard. (iii) Because the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming LTCG at Rs. 7,31,867. (iv) Because the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 36,450 as Other Income. 10. Ground nos. 1 & 3 is regarding addition made by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of Section 50 (C) of the Income tax Act. This ground is common and identical to ground No 1 & 2 raised in appeal No. 161 of 20018. In view of the finding on this issue in I.T.A.T. No. 161 the same is set aside to the record of the Assessing Officer with identical directions. 11. Ground No. 2 is r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
