Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (4) TMI 339

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CIT(A) has correctly directed the value to be adopted which itself becomes ‘cost for the plots’ which were sold subsequently. Consequently, we affirm the orders of Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds.
SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Shri M. Sitaram, DR For The Assessee : Shri B. Satyanarayana, AR ORDER PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M : This is Revenue appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Hyderabad dated 03-11-2014. The issue in this appeal as contested by the Revenue is with reference to taxability of the amount and consideration to be adopted. 2. Briefly stated, assessee is a partner in M/s. Sree Projects and Director in M/s. Swadesh V .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der: 4.1 The appellant submitted copies of income-tax returns and profit and loss account for A.Y.2011-12 and A.Y.2012-13. The details are summarized as under: Particulars A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 Gross Sales 28,54,400 30,00,800 Income returned after claiming certain expenses 19,91,690 21,75,880 Date of filing of income tax return 12.11.2012 14.11.2012 It is pertinent to mention that though the gross receipts realized on sale of plots were credited to profit and loss account, the cost of the plots was not debited to profit and loss account. The total land allotted to the appellant was 10,400 sq.yds, the land sold was 8894 sq.yds, balance land remaining is 1506 sq.yards. the appellant states that this land is still in the n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... real estate conditions the agreed sum was not paid to the appellant except for an amount of ₹ 946,946/- which was offered as income in A.Y.2008-09. 4.3 The Assessing Officer simply made the addition stating that the assessee failed to demonstrate that he had not received money during the previous year relevant to A.Y.2009-10. It is also pertinent to mention that no information is brought on record by the AO in support that the assessee received any money apart from ₹ 946,946/-. Further, the statement of the assessee given during survey proceedings, is categorical that he received only ₹ 946,946/- which would be offered for A.Y.2008-09 and rest of the amounts would be offered on receipt basis. Despite of the categorical .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r acquiring shares in, a co-operative society, company or other association of persons or by way of any agreement or any arrangement or in any other manner whatsoever) which has the effect of transferring, or enabling the enjoyment o], any immovable property. [Explanation 1]-For the purposes of sub-clauses (v) and (vi), "immovable property" shall have the same meaning as in clause (d) of section 269UA.] [Explanation 2]-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "transfer" includes and shall be deemed to have always included disposing of or parting with an asset or any interest therein, or creating any interest in any asset in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, absolutely or conditionally, volu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5.2 It is also pertinent to mention that in subsequent years the plots were sold and the income was offered under the head business income. Since the cost of the plots was not debited to the profit and loss account in both the years i.e. A.Y.2011-12 and 2012-13 the sale consideration adopted for the purpose of computing capital gains shall be the cost of the plots and is to be debited to the profit and loss account in subsequent years for A.Y.2011-12 and A.Y.2012-13". 5. Assessee is not aggrieved, but Revenue is aggrieved and raised the following grounds: "2. The learned CIT(A) ought not to have held that the consideration should be brought to tax for the AY. 2008-09 instead of AY. 2009-10. 3. The learned CIT(A) ought not have reduc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates