9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-58 ("CIT-A") erred in confirming that provisions of Section 50C of Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act") are applicable on the transaction in questions. The appellant prays that the based on the facts of the case the provisions of Section 50C are not applicable. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned- CIT-A has erred in ignoring the fact that, the transaction has taken place on 17 September 2009, the document was unregistered, and the provisions of section 50C of the Act were not applicable to unregistered documents executed prior to 01/10/2009. In spite of clear provisions of law, the Learned CIT-A has rejected the claim without giving any re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 99,500/- and Long Term Capital Gains may be computed. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT-A erred in confirming the claim of interest paid to partners amounting to INR 61,058/- which the Learned Assessing Officer disallowed. The appellant prays that the disallowance of interest is not justified and be deleted. 8. The Learned CIT-A has erred in confirming the levy of interest U/s 234B at INR 2,62,830/-. The appellant denies the liability of payment of interest U/s 234B. On the facts & circumstances of the case the appellant submit that levy of interest U/s 234B at INR 2,62,830/- is not justified and be deleted. As evident the assessee is aggrieved by certain additions arising out of invocation of the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... depreciation was claimed against the same since AY 2006-07 onwards. The cost of acquisition was taken to be WDV as on 31/03/2005. Therefore, the gains would be Long term in nature. However, not convinced, Ld. AO opined that the gains would be short term in nature. 3.2 It further transpired that the sale was affected by the assessee though unregistered transfer deed dated 17/09/2009. Thereafter, the purchaser got registered a 'Deed of Declaration' on 07/09/2011 after paying requisite stamp duty as well as penalty for non-registration of documents within stipulate time. On these facts, Ld. AO opined that the provisions of Sec.50C would be applicable according to stamp duty prevailing on the date of registration of 'deed of declaration' i.e. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er indexation as if the asset was acquired in AY 2006-07. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. At the outset, it could be noted that what the assessee has sold is leasehold rights in certain property and therefore, the provisions of Sec.50C would not be applicable to such a transaction. The provisions of Sec.50C apply in case of transfer of capital asset being land or building or both and are not applicable in case of transfer of leasehold rights in land & buildings. The said proposition is duly supported by the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT V/s Greenfield Hotels & Estates Pvt. Ltd. (77 Taxmann.com 308 dated 24/10/2016) wherein Hon'ble Court has declined to admit the question raised by the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
