9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (1) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an interesting issue. The assessee, it may be stated, by an agreement dated 20-12-1972, had agreed to purchase the office premises No. 5 on 12th floor of the building that was under construction known as 'Atlanta' situate on leasehold plot bearing No. 209, Nariman Point, Bombay-21, from the builders, Shree Rangnath Properties Pvt. Ltd. for a sum of Rs. 68,950. During the course of five to six yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to deduction of 25 per cent as in this case it is clause (i) of sub-section (b) of section 80T which is applicable and not clause (ii). Thus, the controversy is whether the assessee's case falls within clause (i) or clause (ii) of sub-section (b) of section 80T. 2. It is pertinent to mention that clause (ii) speaks of long-term capital gain relating to capital assets other than those referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich the long-term capital gains relating to capital assets, being buildings or lands, or any rights in buildings or lands, exceed five thousand rupees ; " There being no dispute that the building was not ready and the assessee had not taken possession of the office premises and that, in any event, the agreement was not for the purchase of land, both the cases will fall under clause (i) only if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, it does not, itself, create any interest in or charge on such a property. The case before us is not a case of simple contract for the sale or the purchase. In this case, the consideration to the extent of Rs. 65,502.50 as against the total sale consideration of Rs. 65,940 had already passed. It is true that the office premises were not ready as such and the assessee had not taken possession of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
