9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 844X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence of any cost of acquisition incurred by his forefathers in obtaining the land in Inam, machinery provisions for computing the capital gains failed. In support of the said contention, the assessee placed before the ld. CIT(A) some documents asserting Inam Patrak containing the entry of impugned land which was in torn condition and not legible. Assessee did not take up the issue of Inami land before the AO. It was for the first time that the assessee raised this issue before the ld. CIT(A) contending that in the absence of any cost of acquisition incurred by his forefathers in obtaining the land in Inam, the machinery provisions for computing the capital gains failed. In support of the said contention, the assessee placed before the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by different but connected assessees arise out of separate orders passed by the ld. CIT(A) in November, 2016 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10. Since common issues are raised in these appeals, I am, therefore, proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of Late Shri Saifulla Abubakar Inamdar (ITA No.174/PUN/2017) are that the Assessing Officer (AO) got information about the assessee having transferred two properties situated at C.S. No.1845 K 1 to 13, 1845 KH/1 to 5 (East side) and C.S.No.1845 K 1 to 13, 1845 KH/1 to 5 (West side) situated at A Ward, Tal-Karveer, Dist. Kolhapur for a consideration of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omputing full value of consideration at ₹ 39,57,646. Similar calculation was done for cost of acquisition by taking 1/3rd share in C.S.No.1845 K 1 to 13, 1845 KH/1 to 5 and 29.73% share in the remaining property. That is how, the AO computed the long term capital gain pertaining to the assessee‟s share at ₹ 27,15,676. The assessee contended before the ld. CIT(A) that the land sold by the assessee was sanadi land which was received by his forefathers from Sansthanik as Inam issued by the then Chatrapati. Since the Inam did not have any cost of acquisition, the assessee submitted that the capital gain was not chargeable to tax. As this issue was taken before the ld. CIT(A) for the first time, the ld. CIT(A) called for a rema ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evant material on record. Firstly, it is relevant to mention that the assessee did not take up the issue of Inami land before the AO. It was for the first time that the assessee raised this issue before the ld. CIT(A) contending that in the absence of any cost of acquisition incurred by his forefathers in obtaining the land in Inam, the machinery provisions for computing the capital gains failed. In support of the said contention, the assessee placed before the ld. CIT(A) some documents asserting Inam Patrak containing the entry of impugned land which was in torn condition and not legible. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the assessee‟s contention on the ground that the same was not legible. The second view canvassed by the assessee that there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
