9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on account of short term capital gains of Rs. 12,08,600/- u/s. 50C. (Tax effect Rs. 3,92,562/-) 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in applying provisions of Section 50C and considering stamp duty value to be actual consideration. (Tax effect Rs. 3,92,562/-) 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not making reference to DVO and considering stamp duty value to be actual consideration. . (Tax effect Rs. 3,92,562/-) 2. The effective ground in this appeal is against sustaining the addition of Rs. 12,08,600/-. 3. Facts, in brief, are that the case of the assessee was reopened and the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act was framed vide order dated 23.03.2015. The assessing officer observed in the assessment that the assessee had tran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ten synopsis. Ld. counsel vehemently argue that the authorities below have failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee was merely an agent who earned commission. Further, the revenue authorities have failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee had not transferred the land as the owner of the property. He has merely transferred the land as the Power of Attorney holder. 6. On the contrary, Ld. DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. The submissions of the assessee are reproduced as under: 1. The details of land deals were as under: 2. Sr. No. Date Details of Parties Document Khasra No Area Amount 1. 07.12.2005 Shankar Sadhwani to Vikas Virani Agreement to sell 278-283, 270,496, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the documents filed by the assessee. From the registered sale deed furnished by the assessee, it is noticed that the sale deed was executed by one Shri Tejpal Patidar who had entered into agreement to sale with the original land owners namely Shri Shankar Sadhwani S/o Shri Dharmprakash Sadhwani and Shri Bharat Keswani s/o S.K. Keswani. I find no mention in this fact in the assessment order, it is also not clear whether the sale deed was placed before the assessing officer. Under these facts, I therefore, set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment to the file of the assessing officer for making de novo assessment. 7. In result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order was pronounced in the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
