9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Determination of ownership for income tax purposes regarding a property consisting of multiple flats and a cottage. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the revenue against the order of the CIT (A) contending that the CIT(A) erred in determining the ownership of the property for income tax computation. The revenue argued that the assessee should be considered the owner of only four flats and a cottage, not all 24 flats in the building, leading to the deletion of property income assessed by the ITD for the remaining 20 flats. The initial agreement involved the sale of a property with the land and building to M/s Gautam Builders, with certain terms for payment and allocation of flats. However, the final agreement had not been executed by the end of the accounting period, leading the ITO to consider the assessee as the owner of the entire property. Upon appeal by the assessee, the CIT (A) relied on the Bombay High Court decision in a similar case and held that the assessee continued to be the owner of the land while the building belonged to the purchasers of the flats. The CIT(A) determined that the assessee could only be taxed for the two flats and cottage allotted to him, with the income from the other flats to be taxed in the hands of the respective purchasers. The revenue referenced other court decisions, but the Tribunal analyzed the terms of the agreement, emphasizing that the purchaser only acquired the land, and the building was to be constructed by the purchasers. The Tribunal distinguished previous cases where ownership of land and building was not clearly established and found the present case aligned with the Fazalbhoy Investments Co. P. Ltd. case, where the land belonged to one person and the building to another. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the assessee was liable only for the income from the two flats and one cottage allotted to him, while the income from the remaining property should be taxed in the hands of the purchasers. Consequently, the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision.
|
