9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 3.69 against the price of ₹ 1.60 crores paid by the Genus Commu Trade Pvt Ltd. on 23.11.2004, the said company also would be answerable to and subjected to capital gain. Without any murmur about how the Revenue treated such proceeds in the hands of the Genus Commu Trade Pvt Ltd., it would not be proper to question the very transaction and seek to tax the difference in the hands of the assessee. - TAX APPEAL NO. 584 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 25-7-2016 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. A.J. SHASTRI, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Revenue has challenged judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 19.02.2016 raising following quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 3.69 crores being a confirming party. It was noted that there was an unregistered sale deed in favour of said Genus Commu Trade Pvt Ltd. dated 23.11.2009 and the Assessing Officer, therefore, should have made detailed inquires which he failed. CIT (Appeals) was therefore of the opinion that the order of the Assessing Officer was erroneous and also prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. He, therefore, set aside the assessment and directed the Assessing Officer to carry out fresh assessment after proper inquires. 5. The assessee challenged this order before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgement, allowed the appeal of the assessee noting that the Assessing Officer had raised relevant queries which were as unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his context counsel relied on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Additional Commisioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I and ors. reported in 99 ITR 375 . 9. From the record we can see that the Assessing Officer had examined entire transaction including from the point of view of the confirming party receiving considerable portion of the sale proceeds. This is not a case where the Assessing Officer failed to enquire into the transaction at all. Further, the Revenue has not brought anything on record to suggest how the sale proceeds of ₹ 3.69 crores in the hands of Genus Commu Trade Pvt Ltd. was treated. Surely on the receipt of sale proceeds of ₹ 3.69 against the price of ₹ 1.60 crores paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
