9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1880X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said land having been handed over through the registered irrevocable Power of Attorney, the Capital Gains was not liable to be assessed for the AY 2010-11 - as argued same transaction could not be taxed again in the AY 2010-11, just because, the Sale Deed was registered only during the said assessment year HELD THAT:- As in view of the principles laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Balbir Singh Maini 2017 (10) TMI 323 - SUPREME COURT it is held that the Capital Gains, if any, in respect of the transfer of the 14,307 sq.ft. of the land is assessable only during the year 2002 as has been rightly disclosed by the assessee in their returns for the AY 2002-03. Even otherwise, a perusal of the proviso to Sec. 50C(1) ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai, in ITA No. 68/CIT(A)-2/2015-16 dated 30.09.2016 for the AY 2010-11 2. Dr. S. Ganesan, JCIT, represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri S. Sridhar, Adv., represented on behalf of the assessees. 3. As the assessees in both the appeals are interconnected, both the appeals are disposed off by this common order. 4. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the two assessees had by two separate purchase documents dated 04.09.1986 had purchased 11 grounds and 653 sq.ft. (totally 27,053 sq.ft.) of the land at Tank Bunk Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai. The assessees had vide Joint Sale Deed sold the said part of the land to Mr. S. Palanichamy vide Sale Deed dated 17.09.2009. On an earlier occasion, both the assessees had execut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been registered in the name of Shri S. Palanichamy vide Sale Deed dated 17.09.2009. The Ld.AR drew our attention to the copy of the Sale Deed executed on 17.09.2009 wherein the details of the total land holdings and the break up are fully extracted. It was a submission that the AO on the ground that the sale had been registered in 2009 brought to tax, the Capital Gains on transfer of the 14,307 sq.ft. of the land by applying the provisions of Sec. 50C of the Act. It was a submission that the property having already been transferred by a registered Power of Attorney and possession in respect of the said land having been handed over to Shri S. Palanichamy through the registered irrevocable Power of Attorney, the Capital Gains was not liable t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y applying the provisions of Sec. 50C for the AY 2010-11 on the main ground that the assessee had not been able to produce any documentary evidence, any proof of the transaction claimed, to have taken place during the year 2002. A perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) shows that the Ld.CIT(A) has held that the assessees did not release the rights over the land admeasuring 14,307 sq.ft. of the land in March, 2002. The Ld. CIT(A) has taken recourse to the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the appeal filed by the assessees in OS No. 570 of 1998 dated 11.12.2003 wherein the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court has held that both the assessees are entitled for separate possession of 14,307 sq.ft. of the land. However, the AO the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
