9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue neither before the Assessing Authority nor before the First Appellate Authority claimed it as business income - For the first time, before the Tribunal without any factual foundation, the said contention could not have been raised - The Tribunal is justified in declining to entertain the appeal on that ground - Decided against Revenue. - I.T.A. No.290/2007 - - - Dated:- 19-11-2013 - N Kumar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment, the assessee is entitled to 30% of the super built up area out of the 70% of the total area of land. In lieu of 30% of built up area, the assessee is entitled to 14 flats. Accordingly, in April 2000, the developer handed over 14 flats to the assessee. The assessee had sold 13 flats for a sum of Rs.82,17,700/. In terms of the Joint Development Agreement, there was a delay in completing the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ended that the said income is to be assessed as income from business . The Tribunal declined to entertain the said ground, on the ground that, that was not the case of the Revenue either before the Assessing Authority or before the First Appellate Authority and thus, it dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed. 3. As is clear from the aforesaid material on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
