9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- was made in the year 1996. Various Benches of the Tribunal have held that if allotment has been done, then the right of the person in the allotted flat is accrued. In this case, there is no dispute that builder consented to allot the flat as per the request of the assessee, however, when the flat was constructed then the agreement was entered into and possession was given to the assessee. There is no dispute in these facts. In the case of Praveen Gupta Vs. ACIT, [2010 (8) TMI 820 - ITAT DELHI] held that an assessee can be said to have held the flat when he made the payment to the builder and received the allotment letter and, therefore, the benefit of indexation of cost of acquisition of the flat has to be granted from the date of payme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessee. - ITA No.3493/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2012 - SHRI R. K. GUPTA, J For The Appellant : Smt. Arti Vissanji For The Respondent : Mr. Roopak Kumar ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 1-2-2011 of leaned CIT(A)-19, Mumbai relating to the assessment year 2005-06. 2. The first issue relates to allowing the indexation from 24-02-1994 or from 14-02-1999. 3. Brief facts in this regard are that the assessee requested the builder M/s The Great Eastern Shipping Company Limited for allotment of flat at fourth floor bearing flat No.401. The builder M/s Great Eastern Shipping Company issued a letter dated 24-2-1994, by which it was agreed to allot flat No.401 on the fourth floor of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charges and society deposit. As against long term loss of ₹ 97,03,641/- claimed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer computed loss at ₹ 37,21,902/- by restricting indexation from 1999 i.e. the date of possession 14-2-1999. The Assessing Officer disallowed all other expenses also. 5. The CIT(A) confirmed the action of the action of the Assessing Officer by giving his finding in para 5.1 of the appellate order. Now, the assessee is in appeal here before the Tribunal. 6. The Contention raised before the lower authorities was reiterated here before the Tribunal. Reliance was placed on various case laws. A brief written note was also filed, which is placed on record. 7. On the other hand, learned DR strongly placed relianc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indexation of cost of acquisition of the flat has to be granted from the date of payments when he started making payments to the builder and not from the date of execution of conveyance deed. While holding so, the Tribunal has taken into consideration various case laws reported in 119 ITR 372(AP); in case of Credit Rating Information Services of India Limited, decided in ITA No.9396/M/2004, dated 30th April, 2008 and in the case of CIT Vs. Anilaben Upendra Shah [(2003) 262 ITR 657 and many other mentioned in the order. The ratio of the decision is clearly applicable on the facts of the present case for the simple reason that the assessee requested to allot the flat and the builder consented to allot the same vide letter dated 24-2-1994, co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of CIT Vs. R.R.Sood (1986) 161 ITR 92 (Bom). 12. Learned counsel reiterated the contention raised before the authorities below. Further, it was stated that the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court is not applicable on the facts of the present case at all, because in that case, the Hon ble High Court held that the fair market value of the land on the date of conveyance should be adopted as the cost for the purpose of determining the capital gain. It was further submitted that the Hon ble High Court was concerned with the question whether the fair market value of the land as on the date of conveyance or the price mentioned in the deed of conveyance was to be adopted. The Hon ble High Court was not concerned with the question arisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
