9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1093X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come from other sources is not correct. Therefore, we hold that the sale consideration received by the Assessee from the sale of the property should be assessed under the head income from capital gains only. From the record placed before us, we find that the subject property was purchased by the Assessee in the joint names of the Assessee as well as her husband vide agreement dated 15.05.2001 from Sheth Developers Ltd. for a sale consideration of ₹ 9,05,625/- and the said flat was sold by the Assessee vide agreement for sale dated 23.10.2008 to Mr Raju Soni & Mrs Shobhana B Soni for consideration of ₹ 36,51,000/-. In the circumstances, the Assessing Officer should compute the long term capital gains instead of assessing the enti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee is left. Therefore, since the Assessee is not appearing, we heard the Ld. DR and dispose of this appeal on merits. 3. The Ld. DR submits that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment on 06.12.2011 u/s 143(3) of the Act noticed that as per the AIR information Assessee has purchased immovable property for ₹ 36,51,000/-. The Assessee was required to submit the details along with source of investment. The Assessee through authorized representative by letter dated 03.10.2011 submitted certain details but to the query of purchase of property the Assessee denied to have purchased the said property. The Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 133(6) to the Joint Sub Registrar, Boriwali (West), Mumbai and in reply to the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lare the capital gain in his return of income. Therefore, the Ld. DR vehemently placing reliance on the orders of the Ld.CIT (Appeals) submits that the action of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) in confirming the addition is justified and the Assessee s appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. We have heard the Ld. DR, perused the orders of the authorities below. The Assessee deriving income from business and other sources filed her return of income on 09.03.2010 declaring income of ₹ 1,16,640/-. Assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer on 06.12.2011 u/s 143(3) of the Act determining the income of the Assessee at ₹ 37,67,640/-. In the course of assessment proceedings, it came to light that the Assessee has sold property for ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ortion to their respective shares, but such claim can only be entertained if the appellant discharges its onus that the property in question belongs to someone else by giving his/her Income Tax Return details, PAN NO. , Bank A/c. No. and other details. Shri Naresh Khemani, husband of the appellant is not a regular Income Tax filer and if the contention of the appellant is accepted at this stage, the taxable amount, which the A.O. had made out, will go untaxed which will defeat the very purpose of taxation provision. Under the circumstances, appellant's appeal is DISMISSED. 5. As could be seen from the above, Ld. CIT (Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee for the reason that the Assessee could not prove that the property bel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
