9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ual sale consideration was made liable for addition as income from other sources . As explicitly mentioned in the Memorandum that the existing provision was applicable to immovable property received without consideration only and that it did not cover cases of inadequate consideration. In order to include the cases of inadequate consideration, the provision of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act was amended with effect from 01.04.2014. It is categorically mentioned that this amendment was effective from 01.04.2014 onwards and applicable to A.Y. 2014-15 and subsequent years. Therefore, this amendment cannot be extended to past years. Accordingly, no addition u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act could have been made in A.Y. 2012-13 u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act in the case of inadequate consideration. Therefore, the addition as made by the AO cannot be sustained. Addition u/s. 69C - CIT(A) was also wrong in confirming the addition u/s. 50C r.w.s. 69 of the Act. As already discussed earlier, the provision of Section 50C of the Act is not applicable in the case of buyer and the department never had any case of making any addition u/s. 69C - addition u/s. 69C could have been made only in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was having 11.11% share in the property, the assessee s contribution to the property was Rs. 44,78,650/- which was considered as full value of consideration under the provision of Section 50C of the Act. The AO invoked the provision of Section 50C r.w.s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act and treated the jantri value of the property purchased, amounting to Rs. 44,78,650/- as income from other sources and accordingly made the addition, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. Aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. In law, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified confirming the addition of Rs. 44,78,650/- u/s 50C r.w.s. 56(2)(vii) (b) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the entire addition of Rs. 44,78,650/- despite of the facts that the assessee has already shown her share in purchase cost of Rs. 15,00,000/- in return of income filed which required to be allowed. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 44,78,650/- made u/s 56(2)(vii) (b) of the I.T.Act, despite of fact that provision of section 56(2)(vii) (b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld. DR submitted that the matter may be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of investment. 7. We have considered the submissions made by the assessee and the department. The case was reopened by the AO to examine the difference between the purchase price as per sale deed and the jantri value of the property on which the stamp duty was paid. As the assessee was a buyer of the property, no capital gain could have arisen in her hand, therefore, the provision of Section 50C of the Act was not applicable at all in this case. Therefore, we have to examine as to whether this difference could have been added in the hands of the assessee under the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. The provision of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act as applicable for this year is found to be as under: (vii) where an individual or a Hindu undivided family receives, in any previous year, from any person or persons on or after the 1st day of October, 2009 [but before the 1st day of April, 2017], (a) any sum of money, without consideration, the aggregate value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, the whole of the aggregate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istration are not the same, the stamp duty value may be taken as on the date of the agreement, instead of that on the date of registration. This exception shall, however, apply only in a case where the amount of consideration, or a part thereof, has been paid by any mode other than cash on or before the date of the agreement fixing the amount of consideration for the transfer of such immovable property. This amendment will take effect from 1st April, 2014 and will, accordingly, apply in relation to the assessment year 2014-15 and subsequent assessment years. [Clause 9] 9. It has been explicitly mentioned in the Memorandum that the existing provision was applicable to immovable property received without consideration only and that it did not cover cases of inadequate consideration. In order to include the cases of inadequate consideration, the provision of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act was amended with effect from 01.04.2014. It is categorically mentioned that this amendment was effective from 01.04.2014 onwards and applicable to A.Y. 2014-15 and subsequent years. Therefore, this amendment cannot be extended to past years. Accordingly, no addition u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
