9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iple in taxation that the gross receipt cannot be brought to tax, and only the profits can be which means that the cost has to be allowed as deduction. Given this situation, the Tribunal noticed that the AO had accepted the value of the closing stock and that deduction may be allowed as expenditure but in the application of such principle had faltered. Since in the present case the figures provide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rectly held by M/s Unitech Ltd. The balance 60 shares were also held beneficially by it. The assessee purchased 19.559375 acres of land situated in Village Naurang Puri,Tehsil and Dt.Gurgeon for an aggregate of ₹ 39.15 cores; the entire expenditure was paid directly by the holding company which also incurred other expenses such as license fee of ₹ 6.41 cores and security fees of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n its impugned order discussed the nature of the transaction as well as various heads of expenditure. It rejected the claim that the sale purchase of the development rights were not taxable, but was of the opinion that the assessee s alternative claim was well- founded. The proportionate cost of the land of 2.443 acres, the license fee of ₹ 6,41,28,750/-, the scrutiny fee were held allowable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to determine the profits. We notice that the ITAT had relied upon previous ruling of this Court in J M Wire Industries V. CIT (ITR 96/1989 dated 15.7.2010). The Tribunal was of the opinion that when development rights are transferred it has a cost and when the receipt is taxed and the corresponding cost has to be allowed as expenditure. This view is in conformity with the fundamental principle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
