9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctivity jointly undertaken but a pure investment in the project and for which the returns were assured in the form of 10% - The Assessee shared the costs to the extent indicated but this cannot in any manner be termed as an association with the project and particularly as a joint venture – these are the finding of fact and no substantial question of law arises for consideration – Decided against revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 524 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 18-9-2014 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And A. K. Menon,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. A. R. Malhotra with N. A. Kazi For the Respondent : Mr. P. J. Pardiwalla, Senior Counsel, with Mr. Balasaheb Yewale i/b. Rajesh Shah Co. ORDER P.C. 1] This Appeal challenges the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r needs to be set aside. 4] Against such a finding of the Commissioner, this Assessee approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal allowed the Appeal. 5] Mr. Malhotra, learned counsel, appearing for the Revenue submits that the substantial question of law and as framed in the memo of Appeal arises for determination and consideration in this matter. He submits that the Tribunal's findings cannot be sustained in law. This was a clear case where the construction activity was jointly undertaken and in terms of the agreement. Mr. Malhotra has taken us through the order of the Assessing Officer and the findings of the Commissioner in that regard. 6] On the other hand, Mr. Pardiwalla, learned Senior Counsel, submits that this Appeal does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in him in respect of the property. That was in lieu of payment of a sum of ₹ 3 crores and built up area of 2200 sq. ft. approximately comprising of two flats. The Tribunal has rightly understood this not as a joint venture or a development activity jointly undertaken but a pure investment in the project and for which the returns were assured in the form of 10% . The Assessee shared the costs to the extent indicated but as held by the Tribunal, this cannot in any manner be termed as an association with the project and particularly as a joint venture. In such circumstances and for the reasons set out in paragraph 5, 12 and 13 of the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that pure findings of fact and which are consistent with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
