9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition made by the Ld. AO u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) amounting to Rs. 24,33,350/- 2. The Ld. CIT(Appeals ((NFAC) has erred in denying the benefit of Section 56(2)(vii) (b) by stating that Letter of Allotment is not a registered sale deed and thus cannot be considered as date of agreement. 3. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) (NFAC) has also erred in confirming the addition by stating that the payments before the date of registration have been made only by the other co-owner of the property 4. The appellant further reserves the right to alter, amend, or alter the aforesaid grounds of appeal as they may think fit by themselves or by their representatives. 3. Fact in brief is that return of income declaring total income at Rs. 5,93,520/- was filed on 27.08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n made on 18.10.2010 by the husband of the assessee. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and stated that since the property was transferred for the consideration which was less than the stamp duty value, therefore, 50% of the total difference was assessable as income in the assessee's hand. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the assessee holding that since the payment before date of registration has been made only by the other co-owner of the property i.e. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh husband of the assessee, and justified the action of the AO in making the addition of Rs. 24,33,350/- under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. During the course of appellate proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the property was made on 18.12.2010. The assessee has paid Rs. 27,73,980/- before registration of the agreement with registrar of stamps, Maharashtra. We have perused the following provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b) :- Where an individual or a Hindu undivided family receives, in any previous year. from any person or persons on or after the 1st day of October, 2009 but before the 1st day of April, 2017, (a) any sum of money, without consideration, the aggregate value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, the whole of the aggregate value of such sum; (b) any immovable property. (i) without consideration, the stamp duty value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, the stamp duty value of such property, (ii) for a consideration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. We have also considered the decision of ITAT, Pune bench referred by the Ld. Counsel as referred above in the case of Sanjay Dattatraya Dapodikar (Supra) wherein held that where date of agreement for fixing amount of consideration for purchase of a plot of land and date of registration of sale deed were different but assessee, prior to date of agreement, had paid a part of consideration by cheque, provisos to section 56(2)(vii)(b) being fulfilled, stamp value as on date of agreement should be applied for purpose of said section. 7. In the light of the above facts and findings we direct the AO that the stamp duty value on the date of allotment in the case of the assessee on 16.10.2010 be taken for the pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
