2008 (11) TMI 705 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Interpretation of the term "transfer" u/s 269UA(f) of the Income Tax Act in relation to a joint development agreement for property development.

Summary:
The appellant, a non-resident co-owner of property, entered into a joint development agreement with a company for property development. The Assessing Officer valued the property disregarding appellant's submissions. The appellant challenged the initiation of proceedings u/s 148 by the Assessing Officer, claiming it was based on suspicion and without proper basis. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) noted the appellant's non-resident status and ownership share in the property. The appellant, along with other co-owners, exchanged 50% of the property for a constructed area, leading to a capital gain computation. The CIT (Appeals) referenced the Supreme Court's decision on the definition of "transfer" in relation to immovable property. The CIT (Appeals) concluded that the Assessing Officer erred in not considering the transfer of 50% of the land as per the development agreement. The Tribunal affirmed the CIT (Appeals) decision, stating it was based on evidence and proper appreciation of facts. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, finding no substantial question of law to admit the appeal.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the decision was based on proper evaluation of facts and evidence presented before the Tribunal, regarding the interpretation of the term "transfer" u/s 269UA(f) of the Income Tax Act in the context of a joint development agreement for property development.