2023 (8) TMI 33

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essee, a son and a daughter. The assessee has sold the said property and declared full sale consideration in the computation of income. Apparently, the assessee has paid a sum of Rs. 5 Lacs each to son and a daughter to settle the respective claim in the said property. The sum so paid was claimed as deduction which was denied by Ld. AO. The assessee accepted the same and paid due taxes thereupon. AO imposed impugned penalty by holding that there was misrepresentation or suppression of facts. It could not be said that the assessee misrepresented or suppressed any material facts, All the computations were disclosed in the return of income and the same was furnished to Ld. AO also during the course of assessment proceedings. The assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der. 2. During the course of assessment proceeding, Ld. AO perused the computation of income and noted that the assessee computed Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) after claiming deduction of Rs. 5 Lacs each for share of daughter and son. It transpired that the property under consideration was purchased by late husband of the assessee who expired in the year 2009 intestate, The entire investment was made by the husband, however, the property was registered in the name of wife assessee. The Ld. AO disputed the deduction of Rs. 5 Lacs claimed by the assessee for each of the son and daughter. The Ld. AO held that registration was executed in the hands of the assessee and therefore, sale consideration could not be split in three parts as conten .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ces of income. The husband died intestate leaving behind the assessee, a son and a daughter. The assessee has sold the said property and declared full sale consideration in the computation of income. Apparently, the assessee has paid a sum of Rs. 5 Lacs each to son and a daughter to settle the respective claim in the said property. The sum so paid was claimed as deduction which was denied by Ld. AO. The assessee accepted the same and paid due taxes thereupon. However, Ld. AO imposed impugned penalty by holding that there was misrepresentation or suppression of facts. However, on the given facts, it could not be said that the assessee misrepresented or suppressed any material facts, All the computations were disclosed in the return of income .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X