9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se. 2. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the A.O. u/s 50 C on the ground that lease hold right hold right are not covered under the purview of this section. 3. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ignored the fact that transfer of the property took place in the year under consideration on 01.10.2008." 4. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ignored the fact that during the course of assessment proceedings, the appellant failed to file any detail of the purchase of the property." 5. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciated the fact that it is the owner of the property who can sell the same. Before becoming the owner of a pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 29.12.2011 passed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 29.12.2011, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 06.11.2012 has deleted the addition and allowed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved with the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal. 5. On the contrary, Ld. A.R. of the Assessee relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that Ld. First Appellate Authority has elaborately discussed and adjudicated the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly banned by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The fact that Sh. Sanjay Kumar ultimately transferred the lease hold rights through transfer deed dated 01.10.2008 in the name of the company further supports the appellant's contention that he had sold all his rights in the property on 28.04.2004 by appointing Sh. Sanjay Kumar as his OPA according to which the GPA appointed by the appellant on 28.02.2004 continued to be valid and was not revoked till 01.10.2008. On that date it was the OPA, Sh. Sanjay Kumar who signed the deed of Transfer of lease hold rights in favour of the company M/s Rosebud Construction Pvt. Ltd. and not the appellant. The appellant's name in the deed of Transfer of lease hold rights was mentioned only because the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transfer of the property. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the assessee's name in the deed of Transfer of lease hold rights was mentioned only because the original allotment was in his name, hence, the assessee did not have ownership of the said property during the year under consideration and therefore, there is no question of transaction of sale of the said property during the year under consideration and capital gains is not accrued. However, in our considered view, the Capital Gains should be taken into account only after deducted the price of the plot from the value of the property i.e. Rs. 99,20,000 (-) Minus Rs. 16,75,000/- i.e. the cost of the plot (to be paid to the Noida Authority) = Rs. 82,45,000/-. Accordingly, we s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
