9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... non-consideration of objections has led to serious prejudice to the assessee. It was submitted that the MOU w.r.t. these properties was registered on 25.05.1996 and power of attorney was registered on 12.09.2005. It was submitted by learned counsel for the assessee also that matter may be set aside so that there is proper consideration of the objections by the authorities below. Thus, in nutshell both the ld. Counsel for the assessee and the ld. D.R. had both fairly agreed that these issues in cross appeal requires reconsideration by authorities below and matter need to be set aside for re-determination of the issues on merits, after granting proper and sufficient opportunity to the assessee and the AO as per Rule 46A(3) of 1962 Rules, als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 50C are applicable on sale/transfer of capital assets being plot No. 749 and 750. The appellant submits that the provisions of section 50C are not applicable as the Agreement for Sale was not registered. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in accepting the Stamp Duty Valuation of Power of Attorney registered with the Sub-Registrar of Assurances without considering various negative factors attached to the property sold. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in taking the appellant's share in plot No.750 at 1/4th share as against appellant's claim of 1/8th share. 4. On the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rn nor the return was revised and hence against the ratio laid down in the case of Goetze India Ltd. vs CIT reported in 2841TR 323(SC). 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground(s) be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored. 4. The genesis of these cross appeals are the income from long term capital gain which had arisen to the assessee on the sale of two plots by the assessee both situated at village Nahur, Taluka Kurla Bhandup , one plot bearing survey number 73, CTS no. 750 admeasuring 1600 square yards and second plot bearing survey no. 63 , CTS no. 749 admeasuring 4000 square yards. The dispute had arisen between the rival parties with respect to the share of the assessee in the said pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions and mandate of 1961 Act and 1962 Rules. Thus, learned DR prayed that the appellate order of learned CIT(A) be set aside and issue may be restored to the file of learned CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication of the matter on merits. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was no registered agreement with the builder. The documents registered were power of attorney s only and not the agreement for sale, hence, section 50C of 1961 Act is not applicable. It is contended that the authorities below adopted stamp duty valuation which is legally unsustainable. It is also submitted that the DVO has not considered the objections raised by the assessee vide letter dated 8.3.2011, submitted in response to notice dated 09-02-2011 issued by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
