Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (12) TMI 688 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
Appeal against order of CIT(Appeals)-I, Raipur on grounds of unjustness, unfairness, and violation of natural justice; Addition of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on property transfer not owned by assessee; Lack of proper opportunity of hearing violating natural justice; Assessment of income at Rs.3,22,61,520/- including LTCG of Rs. 3,27,93,522/-; Dispute over tax liability on property transfer; Interpretation of power of attorney holder's role in property sale; Justification of bringing income/gain to tax in power of attorney holder's hands.

Detailed Analysis:
The appellant challenged the order of CIT(Appeals)-I, Raipur, alleging unjustness, unfairness, and violation of natural justice. The dispute arose from the addition of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on the sale of a property not owned by the assessee. The Assessing Officer (A.O) observed that the property was transferred by the assessee under a registered sale deed but was not disclosed in the income tax return. The assessee claimed to have acted as a power of attorney holder for the actual owners, denying tax liability. The A.O disagreed, asserting that the assessee received the entire sale consideration and was liable for LTCG. The A.O assessed the income at Rs.3,22,61,520/-, including LTCG of Rs. 3,27,93,522/-.

During the appeal process, it was established that the property was sold by the actual owners through the assessee as a power of attorney holder. The Tribunal found no justification to tax the income/gain in the hands of the assessee who merely facilitated the transaction. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that a power of attorney does not confer ownership rights, and income should be assessed in the hands of the rightful owners. The Tribunal noted that the A.O's failure to locate the owners did not justify taxing the income in the wrong person's hands. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(Appeals) order and vacated the addition of LTCG made by the A.O in the assessee's hands.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee based on the established facts and legal principles. The decision highlighted the importance of correctly attributing income/gain from property transactions to the rightful owners rather than intermediaries like power of attorney holders.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved, the arguments presented, and the Tribunal's decision based on legal interpretations and factual evidence presented during the proceedings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates