9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 662X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operty has to be considered as in the hands of previous owner. AO was right in considering the actual cost of acquisition in the hands of the previous owner, however, while calculating the indexed cost, the AO has applied the indexed cost from 2008-09 instead of 1988 when the property was acquired by the previous owner. CIT (A) has not looked into the issue that the indexation cost computed by the AO is not taken from the year of acquisition of the property by the previous owner but was taken from the year when the property was gifted by the Grandmother to the assessee. Accordingly, we find that the orders of the AO as well as LD. CIT (A) are suffering from gross error to the extent of calculating indexed cost of acquisition. We direct t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tional evidence in support of this plea of allowing deduction under section 54 towards the payment made for furniture and fixtures - HELD THAT:- The assessee has not claimed such a payment as part of the investment made in the new residential house for the purpose of deduction under section 54 of the IT Act. Even before the LD. CIT (A), the assessee has not raised such a ground and only two grounds which are raised before the Tribunal were raised before the LD. CIT (A). Therefore, such a plea which is completely new and requires investigation of new facts not brought before the AO or LD. CIT (A) cannot be accepted at this stage. The assessee has even not raised any additional ground before us. Therefore, in these facts and circumstances, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd tax incidence had increased. 2. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) failed to consider that the transfer expenses of ₹ 5,00,000/- were paid by the appellant to the persons who helped in sale of the property and did all formalities of sale proceedings. 3. Tax and interest levied by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is unjustified and incorrect. Hence the Appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is bad in the eye of law and deserve to be set aside. Ground No. 1 is regarding incorrect computation of the indexation cost of acquisition of the property in question acquired by the assessee under a Gift from Grandmother. 2. The assessee is an Individual and filed her return of income on 31st March, 2014 dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e action of the AO before the LD. CIT (A) but could not succeed. 3. We have heard the ld. A/R as well as the ld. D/R and considered the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the AO has applied provisions of section 49(1) which is applicable in this case as the mode of acquisition by the assessee is Gift and, therefore, the cost of acquisition of the property has to be considered as in the hands of previous owner. To that extent the AO was right in considering the actual cost of acquisition in the hands of the previous owner, however, while calculating the indexed cost, the AO has applied the indexed cost from 2008-09 instead of 1988 when the property was acquired by the previous owner. The LD. CIT (A) while rejecting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, the AO has disallowed the claim for want of documentary evidence. He has referred to an Affidavit/Undertaking of one Imran Khan wherein he has acknowledged the receipt of ₹ 5,00,000/- from assessee. Except the said Affidavit/Undertaking, the assessee is not having any other documentary evidence. The ld. A/R has further submitted that even otherwise it is a prevailing practice and assessee being a lady, could not have sold the property without help of the property agent and, therefore, the claim of the assessee is reasonable and incurred in connection with the transfer of the property is allowable under section 48 of the IT Act. Thus the ld. A/R has pleaded that when the claim of the assessee is a reasonable claim and assessee bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itle of the seller over the property. Therefore, the property agent is not merely helping in registration of the property but he is also instrumental in finding out the buyer and seller as well as ensuring the clear title as well as the payment of the consideration. Therefore, once the transfer of the immovable property requires documentation, scrutiny of the documents and title, then the expenditure is bound to be incurred in respect of such work performed by the real estate Agents. Hence in the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the expenditure @ 2% of the sale consideration which is a prevailing rate for such type of transactions while computing the Long Term Capital Gain. The AO is directed to allow 2% of the sale considerati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
