TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this factual backdrop that the Assessing Officer’s scrutiny revolved around AIR information disclosing the assessee to have acted as power of attorney of the other fourteen co-owners in acting as the sole vendor receiving entire sale consideration of 30 lacs. The fact however remains that his share therein was of 2 lacs only. We therefore conclude that the lower authorities have erred in proceeding to impose the impugned penalty by treating the said AIR information and subsequent developments as the foundation for holding the assessee to have concealed his income. It is further not clear as to how the entire sale consideration of 2 lacs would be treated as assessee’s income since the same is either capital gains or business income to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whole issue appears to be arising from a sale transaction of an immovable property sold for ₹ 30 lacs. The Assessing Officer received AIR information about the assessee having entered into the above immovable property transaction. He thus put up the assessee on notice regarding the same who in turn denied to have executed any such transfer. The Assessing Officer thereafter got received the necessary sale document containing assessee's signatures to add the abovestated sum of ₹ 30 lacs as his income in assessment order dated 29.11.2010. He further initiated the impugned penalty proceedings. 4. We now advert to the CIT(A)'s order restricting the above addition to ₹ 2 lacs only after concluding that the assessee is one of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no sale of property, since purchaser was not able to make use of said property as per conditions attached to sale. Amount of Rs. l lakh deposited in the bank account of Shantivan Members Association could also not be distributed to members but was utilized for common expenses of the Society. Appellant submitted that in any case, entire sale proceeds would go to Shantivan Members Association, a registered separate entity and no part of proceeds could go to any member directly and thus there was no question of taxing individual member without receipt of money from Shantivan Members Association. Appellant submitted that on one hand, the Id. AO accepted that property was jointly held in the name of 15 members and appellant got right to sell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the bank account of Shantivan Members Association and not in the individual bank account of appellant. It is therefore clear that the land in question was owned jointly by 15 persons, who sold it to Nehul Patel. Entire capital gains arising on sale of land cannot be taxed in the hands of appellant alone. Appellant's contentions about capital gains not arising due to sale transaction being not complete due to non fulfillment of condition regarding construction etc. are however, not tenable. In the sale deed, there are no such conditions as stated by the appellant regarding use of land for construction by the purchaser. Transfer of land is completed on execution of sale deed and handing over of its possession. As clearly mentioned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel representing assessee vehemently argued that both the lower authorities have erred in making the impugned addition of ₹ 2 lacs in question. He however failed to dispute the fact that the assessee was one of the 15 co-owners of the immovable property in question fetching total consideration price of ₹ 30 lacs wherein his share was that of ₹ 2 lacs only. We therefore conclude that both the lower authorities have rightly made the impugned addition in assessee's hands. His sole substantive ground as well as quantum appeal ITA No.2487/Ahd/2011 fail accordingly. 6. We now proceed to deal with assessee's penalty appeal ITA No.1481/Ahd/2014 challenging correctness of Section 271(1)(c) penalty of ₹ 62000/- pertaining to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|