TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transferred to seller parties as per court s order. The Assessing Officer after perusal of documents, did not find taxability of the transaction. Thus, the finding of the PCIT that no inquiries have been carried out in respect of sale transaction is factually incorrect. Assessee got registered 11 acres 9 gunthas agricultural land on 11.03.2013 along with 5 other persons jointly in their favour and on same date, 5 acres and 29 gunthas of land transferred back to the seller party. In this transaction, even the land is treated as Capital Asset, there will not be any capital gain, the stamp duty value of purchase and sale being same on the day of transaction. Invoking of Section 50C - Relevant provision has been made effective from 01. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The Hon ble CIT erred in initiated the proceedings u/s 263 and directed Assessing Officer to pass fresh assessment order. The order passed u/s 263 deserves to be set aside. 3. That any order ground(s) that may be raised at the time of hearing. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee was engaged in trading of mobile handset and recharge coupon etc. in the name proprietor concern, namely, Simran Communication . For the year under consideration, the assessee filed return of income, declaring total income of ₹ 2,93,860/ on 28th March, 2014. The return of income filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and statutory notices under the Act were issued and complied with. The assessment u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gistered at a stamp duty value of ₹ 1,61,00,000/-. As per record the land under consideration is not an agricultural land. The distance of Rahatgaon from Amravati is 4 kms. As such land under consideration is a Capital Asset. Thus, the sale of the property attracts Capital Gain as per the I.T. Act. The A.O. has merely verified the issue from the perspective that stamp duty for acquisition of property was borne by the assessee among six persons. The AO however ignored the fact that there was transfer of a capital asset and the same was liable to be taxed as capital gain and further that provisions of section 50C were also attracted. The AO has erred in his inference that the transaction was not liable to capital gains on a completely e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he issue from this perspective. It is however seen that in his notice dated 29.01.2016 the assessing officer has merely inquired whether the assessee paid the stamp duty for the transaction and whether capital gain tax was paid after the transaction. The assessing officer did not look into the issue of taxability at all. Very preliminary questions as above were asked. In fact, there is no effort on the part of the assessing officer to understand the transaction itself. For this reason it cannot be said that the assessing officer looked into the issue and decided the same thereafter. Evidently, this is an order passed without looking into the issue at all. Therefore, the same is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. I am ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... way of registered deed to the seller itself. Thus, there was no short term or long term capital gain on the sale of the land, even if the land is treated as capital asset. The provisions of Section 50C were also not applicable in view of the sale agreement entered into in the year 31.03.2013 at the circle rates and the section 50C came into operation w.e.f. 01.04.2013. The assessee has filed all the documentary evidences in support of its claim. 3.5 The learned CIT(DR) did not controvert this factual submission of the learned counsel and relied on the order of the PCIT. 3.6 In our opinion the action of learned CIT(A) is not justified due to the following reasons: (i) The Assessing Officer vide query No. 4 of the questionnaire dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
