TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accepted then it will result in non-taxation of the entire amount of sale consideration as in the case of assessee's son amount of sale consideration disclosed in his return of income, has already been accepted by the Department and no direction can be passed to enhance son's income in a concluded assessment. Since, it is the claim of the assessee that the entire sale consideration has further been invested by the assessee and her son in another residential flat at Khar, therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the AO to examine as to how much of the amount of sale consideration received by the assessee has been invested in a new residential property for the purpose of claiming exemption u/s 54 and to grant the exemption to the assessee under the said section if the other conditions laid down therein are satisfied. Sale consideration on sale of gold ornaments, the assessee had claimed exemption u/s 54F - The lower authorities denied the claim of the assessee in absence of any documentary proof of having made investment as per requirement of section 54F. In the present case, AR referred to sale invoices of 2 jewellers, forming part to which jewellery weighing abou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 48, Mumbai, [ learned CIT(A) ], for the assessment year 2014 15. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] erred in upholding the action of the learned Income-tax Officer - 23(2)(5), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer ) in determining the Total Income of the appellant at Rs. 18,42.982/- while passing the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as against returned income of Rs.1,53,634/ . Long Term Capital Gains on sale of flat- Rs.1,08,637/ 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.1,08,637/- on account of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) arising on sale of flat without acknowledging the fact that the said flat was jointly owned by the appellant and her son having equal share and considering 50:50 ratio, the resultant LTCG after exemption under section 54 of the Act would be Nil. 3. Without prejudice to what has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating from the record, are: The assessee is an individual. For the year under consideration, assessee e-filed her return of income on 29/03/2015 declaring total income at Rs. 1,53,634. From the details filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it was observed that during the financial year 2013 14 the assessee has sold residential flat at Bandra for the total consideration of Rs. 1,00,20,000. The said property was jointly owned by the assessee and her son, Shri Pravin Madanlal Shah. Upon verification of the return filed by assessee‟s son, it was observed that he has offered under the head capital gain‟, the value of consideration from sale of the said property at Rs. 14,50,000 only against which he has claimed deduction under section 48 the cost of acquisition without indexation at Rs. 7,09,827 and the balance amount of Rs. 7,40,173 is offered for taxation. The bank statement of assessee‟s son also confirms the amount of Rs. 14,50,000 received by him. The Assessing Officer ( AO‟) vide order dated 30/11/2016 passed under section 143 (3) of the Act, in the case of assessee, treated the balance amount of Rs. 85,70,000 (Rs. 1,20,00,000 minus Rs. 14,5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... error committed in filing the return of income made various additions to the total income of the assessee. The learned AR further submitted that out of the total consideration of Rs. 1,00,20,000 upon sale of the residential flat at Bandra, assessee share can either be restricted to 50% being a jointly owned property or proportionate to the cost of contribution. However, the AO considered the entire consideration credited to the assessee‟s bank account as long term capital gains in the hands of the assessee. The learned AR also submitted that the assessee is also entitled to claim exemption under section 54F in respect of capital gains arising from sale of gold ornaments. 6. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative vehemently relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities and submitted that the entire consideration on sale of residential flat is to be taxed and since the assessee‟s son has only declared partial amount of consideration, which is received in his account, the balance amount credited in assessee‟s bank account is to be taxed in assessee‟s hands only. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t since the AO is common to both the assessee and her son, therefore, in all fairness AO has not brought any excess amount to tax in the hands of the assessee‟s son but has accepted the amount of Rs. 14,50,000 offered for taxation in his return. The AO has accordingly brought to tax the amount of Rs. 85,70,000, which was credited in assessee‟s bank account, for the purpose of computation of capital gains. We are of the considered view that if the plea of the assessee is accepted then it will result in non-taxation of the entire amount of sale consideration of Rs. 1,00,20,000, as in the case of assessee‟s son amount of sale consideration of Rs. 14,50,000, disclosed in his return of income, has already been accepted by the Department and no direction can be passed to enhance son‟s income in a concluded assessment. Since, it is the claim of the assessee that the entire sale consideration of Rs. 1,00,20,000 has further been invested by the assessee and her son in another residential flat at Khar, therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the AO to examine as to how much of the amount of sale consideration received by the assessee has been invested in a new res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d not dispute the sale consideration of gold ornaments at Rs 15,16,161, however, added the balance amount of Rs. 8,57,000 by holding that no explanation has been offered by the assessee. In the present case, we find that the Revenue has not disputed the sale consideration of Rs. 1,00,20,000 of the residential property at Bandra and has computed capital gains in the hands of the assessee by considering amount of Rs. 85,70,000 credited in her bank account. Further, the sale consideration of gold ornaments at Rs 15,16,161 has also been reasonably satisfied, as noted supra. In the present case, there is neither any allegation that the amount of Rs. 8,57,000 has been received by the assessee or credited in her bank account nor any material has been brought on record in this regard. Merely because the assessee could not explain the balance amount of Rs. 8,57,000, as mention in her computation of income and return, the same was added to the total income of the assessee by stating the same as income from other sources. Thus, in view of the above, we find no basis in sustaining the addition of Rs. 8,57,000, which appears to be merely a typographical error on the part of the assessee, while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
