TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 503X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operty does indicate that the transfer from the assessee to the ARC, via SBI perhaps, taken place at an earlier stage. That is the year of transfer in which the taxability arises so far as the assessee is concerned. There is no categorical finding about that aspect of the matter at any stage. It is also not clear as to what is the date on which the transfer took place from the assessee to the State Bank of India, and what is the documentation or court/ DRT orders in this regard. This aspect of the matter has simply not been examined. We deem it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for recording a specific finding in this regard, after giving a due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, in accordanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resident), and Pavan Kumar Gadale (Judicial Member) For the Appellant Madhur Agarwal, along with Fenil Bhat and Kiran Mehta For the Respondent Shailja Rai along with Manoj Sinha ORDER Per Pramod Kumar, VP: 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has challenged the correctness of the order dated 3rd September 2015, passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. The assessee before us is an individual, and it is a case of reopened assessment. The reassessment proceedings on the short ground that the assessee has sold immovable property valued at Rs 2,05,24,524 on 26.9.2015 and that the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee, which was offered as collateral security by the assessee to the SBI, was assigned to the ARCIL. The ARCIL, vide agreement dated 1st September 2005, sold this property to Advent Developers Pvt Ltd (ADPL) for Rs 2,00,00,000, whereas, as per stamp duty valuation, the market rate of the property was Rs 2.04,93,500. The assessee was a confirming party to this sale transaction between the ARCIL and ADPL. The Assessing Officer took note of these facts as also of the fact that, as noted in the sale deed, confirming party has surrendered all his rights, title and interest to the vendor (i.e ADPL). He thus proceeded to tax the entire amount of Rs 2,04,93,500 as a long-term capital gain. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ving a due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, in accordance with the law and by way of a speaking order. The question of taxability of capital gains will arise only in the year in which such a transfer takes place. As the matter is being reknitted to the file of the CIT(A) for this purpose, all contentions remain open. 5. There is, also, a fundamental point regarding the protection of legitimate interests of the revenue. In most of the cases in which the assets are taken over, as part of the recovery of commercial borrowings, by the bankers, or by the ARCs, the owners of these assets are not in a position to pay their dues, and that is the reasons that these assets get taken over. However, on sale of such properties, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roperties, held by the bankers and ARCs as collateral securities, and inevitable liquidity or bankruptcy issues with such borrowers, there must already be good amount of such avoidable losses to the revenue. Such a position must not continue. 6. As we have remitted the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after taking a call on the year in which the actual transfer has taken place, the issues raised by the assessee with respect to the correct quantification of capital gains are academic at this stage. Let the CIT(A), if so necessary, recompute the capital gains after taking into duly indexed cost of acquisition and the cost of improvement, and let the assessee furnish necessary information input in this regard. This a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
