9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m capital gain and the AO made further addition of ₹ 4.61 lakhs. In view of the fact that the assessee was not at all chargeable to tax in respect of receipt of ₹ 10 lakhs for acting as a consenting party and the entire sale consideration has already been taxed in the hands of Mrs. Anuradha Ashok Satbhai, his mother, as a sole owner, we hold that the amount of long term capital gain of ₹ 5.39 lakhs wrongly offered by the assessee is also not chargeable to tax in the same manner in which the addition of ₹ 4.61 lakhs was wrongly made by the AO. It is trite that no income can be taxed merely because the assessee wrongly offered it in his return. I am reminded of the mandate of Art. 265 of the Constitution of India, whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. CIT(A) that sale consideration of ₹ 1.50 crores was received on transfer of property, out of which ₹ 1.20 crores was retained by his mother; ₹ 20 lakhs was given to his father; and ₹ 10 lakhs to him as consenting parties. It was further submitted that Mrs. Anuradha Ashok Satbhai had been treated as sole owner of the land and thus, no addition at all was called for in the hands of assessee. The ld. CIT(A) in para 5.3.5 of impugned order discussed the fact that while deciding the appeal of Mrs. Anuradha Ashok Satbhai, he has held that she was the sole owner of the land and the entire capital gain was chargeable to tax in her hands. Still, he approved the addition made by the AO in the hands of the assessee. 4. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be permitted. 5. Here is a case in which the assessee inadvertently suo motu offered ₹ 5.39 lakhs as long term capital gain and the AO made further addition of ₹ 4.61 lakhs. In view of the fact that the assessee was not at all chargeable to tax in respect of receipt of ₹ 10 lakhs for acting as a consenting party and the entire sale consideration has already been taxed in the hands of Mrs. Anuradha Ashok Satbhai, his mother, as a sole owner, I hold that the amount of long term capital gain of ₹ 5.39 lakhs wrongly offered by the assessee is also not chargeable to tax in the same manner in which the addition of ₹ 4.61 lakhs was wrongly made by the AO. It is trite that no income can be taxed merely because the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
