9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1548X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee. With respect to the balance land, the High Court held that no transfer of the same had taken place even by virtue of the JDA and hence the assessee was not exigible to capital gain tax on the same. Also see Shri Balwinder Singh case[2015 (8) TMI 1384 - ITAT CHANDIGARH ] In view of the above, since the addition made to the income of the assessee does not survive, the question of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) does not arise at all. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 491/Chd/2015 - - - Dated:- 8-9-2015 - H. L. Karwa (Vice President) And Rano Jain (Accountant Member) For the Appellant : Sunil Kumar For the Respondent : Tej Mohan Singh ORDER H. L. Karwa (Vice President) This appeal filed by the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that as per the agreement dated 25.2.2007, each of the member of the Society including the assessee , owning plot of 500 sq. yards were to receive ₹ 82,50,000/- in cash and a furnished flat measuring 2250 sq. feet with market value of ₹ 1,01,25,000/- calculated @ ₹ 4500/- per square feet. Thus, the total consideration for transfer of plot came to ₹ 1,83,75,000/-. The Assessing officer computed the income by way of capital gains by adopting this amount as sale consideration. Finally, the assessment was made by taking capital gains at ₹ 1,77,74,258/-. The Assessing officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Assessing office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn of A.Y. 2008-09. It is clear from the arguments raised by the appellant that there were certain controversies and disputes in regard to the transfer of plot. In fact, I understand that the various issues have till not been resolved and the construction of the building, in which the appellant was to get a flat as a part of sale consideration, has not started till date. In these peculiar circumstances, the belief of the appellant that the capital gains, on which he has to pay tax, has to be computed only on the basis of the amount which he has actually received, cannot be considered to be totally unreasonable, though it is not strictly legal. The fact that all the material facts which were required to compute the correct capital gain we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ITAT, Chandigarh Bench in the case of ITO Vs. Shri Balwinder Singh Dhillon in ITA NO. 1140/Chd/2014 (assessee belonging to same group) relating to assessment year 2008-09, wherein the Tribunal vide its order dated 3.8.2015, decided a similar issue in favour of the assessee, and confirmed the order of Ld. CIT(A) in cancelling the penalty of ₹ 20,25,000/- levied u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act, for the AY- 2008-09, observing as under:- 5. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The facts of the case of assessee are admittedly identical as have been decided by the Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Shri C.S. Atwal Vs CIT, Ludhiana (supra) in which the Hon&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
