9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 1080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sold his residential flat during the year under consideration. The High Court with the consent of the Counsel of parties referred the dispute and differences between the parties to Mr. Markand Gandhi Sole Arbitrator. We have further seen the arbitration petition wherein the assessee has claimed interest due to delay in payment of agreed amount and the refund of reimbursement of credit received by purchaser from the Housing Society only, where the flat is situated. All these facts were duly considered by learned Commissioner (Appeals) before passing the impugned order. Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of learned Commissioner (Appeals). Disallowance of cost of improvement in respect of flat under reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner(Appeals) erred in computing long-term capital gain of ₹ 50,86,932/- on impugned sale of flat though the transfer of the said flat was not complete as clause 11 and 22 of Article of agreement dated 28 December 2007. (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in disallowing 476000/-out of total cost of improvement of ₹ 576000/-in respect of flat under reference while determining the long-term gain. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income for the relevant assessment year on 8th September 2008 declaring total income of ₹ 4,63,136/-. The assessing officer while framing asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain of ₹ 50,86,932/- and added to the total income of the assessee. On appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) the action of assessing officer was sustained. Further aggrieved, by the order of Commissioner (Appeals) the assessee filed present appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned AR of the assessee and learned DR for the revenue and perused the material available on record. Ground No. 1 relates to computation of long-term capital gain on sale of flat. The learned AR of the assessee argued that the assessee sold a residential flat during the year under reference and earned profit, however, on account of default by purchases the sale remains incomplete. The assessee has taken legal action against the purchaser by filing a Civil Sui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... full value of consideration of the property. The only grievances of the assessee is that the purchasers was given a credit of ₹ 3.5 lakh by the Society Realty flat in question situated and that the said amount should have been paid to the assessee instead of purchasers. The assessee has raised a dispute regarding the entitlement of said credit of ₹ 3.5 lakh before Hon ble Bombay High Court. We have seen the order of Hon ble Bombay High Court dated 8 October 2010. We have seen that the assessee has not disputed the execution of transfer deed. Even before the High Court while filing a petition or in the Arbitration the assessee not sought relief for rescinding the contract of sale/ transfer deed. The only dispute before the High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... repair and improvement work, and the payments made to M/s Amrut Construction, interior decorator along with the receipts. It was further argued that all these expenses were duly shown by assessee in the return of income. On the other hand the learned DR for the revenue supported the order of authorities below. The learned DR for the revenue further argued that there is no evidence on record to prove that assessee is regularly filing his balance-sheet before the revenue authorities. The entries shown by the assessee in his computation of income are self-serving statement. It was further argued that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has already given partial relief to the assessee. The assessee is not entitled for any further relief under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department since 2003 and good evidences to establish the cost of the flat. The assessing officer has not given any comment on the cost of the flat shown in the balance-sheet and rejected the claim of assessee on the ground that one party did not reply and on another notice was not served. We have seen that learned Commissioner (Appeals) while considering this ground of appeal observed that the assessee has filed certain evidence by way of return of income and balancesheet for earlier years the case for assessment year 2003- 04 and 2007- 08 which allegedly shown the cost of flat at ₹ 11,53,434/- against ₹ 5,77,475/- adopted by assessing officer for computation of long-term capital gain in the assessment order. 7. The lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
