9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act. However, when the capital asset is an immovable property by reason of the provisions contained in the Transfer of Property Act read with the Registration Act, transfer of an immovable property of the nature dealt with herein requires an instrument which is also required to be registered - there is no conveyance by the appellant in favour of AOP, nor there is any agreement between the appellant and the AOP coupled with the contention by the AOP that in pursuance with that agreement and in part performance thereof it is in possession of the property in question - Decided against assessee. - I T. Appeal No. 04/2013 - - - Dated:- 25-6-2013 - Barin Ghosh and Servesh Kumar Gupta, JJ. For the Appellants : Mr Sudhanshu Srivastava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial land was sold. The entire capital gains tax was fastened upon the appellant. Appellant approached the learned CIT (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) found that AOP came in to existence on 16th June, 2007 and the land in question was sold by AOP on 12th February, 2008. It, accordingly, held that assessing full amount of capital gains in the hands of appellant is not correct since he is only one constituent of AOP. CIT (Appeals) held that when the land vested in the AOP on 16th June, 2007 the land had already been converted from agricultural to industrial. The CIT (Appeals) held that in terms of Section 2 (47) of the Act, the land in question stood transferred on 16th June, 2007 from individual owners to AOP. The CIT (Appeals) directed the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovable property agreed to be transferred. In the instant case, there is no conveyance by the appellant in favour of AOP, nor there is any agreement between the appellant and the AOP coupled with the contention by the AOP that in pursuance with that agreement and in part performance thereof it is in possession of the property in question. We are, therefore, of the view that there was no just reason by the CIT (Appeals) to interfere with the order of the Assessing Officer and we are also of the view that the Tribunal did not take notice of what may be treated as a transfer from one to the other in terms of the general law as well as in terms of the laws applicable to income tax. However, there being no independent appeal by the revenue, we re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
