9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 20th March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2007-08. By the impugned order, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], deleting penalty imposed upon the Respondent-Assessee under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessing Officer did not accept the sale consideration in view of Section 50C of the Act and adopted the sale consideration at Rs. 2 Crores being the stamp duty valuation of the property as deemed consideration received on sale of the property. The Respondent-Assessee did not challenge the order passed in the assessment proceedings as even after the addition, it had a net loss. 4. In the pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground that merely because a claim is rejected would not warrant imposition of penalty. 5. On further appeal by the Revenue, the Tribunal by the impugned order upheld the finding of the CIT(A) by holding that the higher stamp duty valuation of the land and the building sold by the assessee was clearly indicated in the agreement which was filed along with return of income. Thus, there was a c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act in respect of property at Pune as the same was not used for business (depreciable asset) and, therefore, not covered by Section 50 of the Act. So far as the property at Kalol was concerned, it was depreciable asset which would be governed by Section 50 of the Act and Section 50C of the Act would have no application. This was a view taken at the time filing the return of income. 8. We fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
