Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Appeal allowed for reassessment under Section 50C with emphasis on taxpayer relief</h1> <h3>Dharamshibhai Sonani Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 9, Surat</h3> The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, considering the retrospective applicability of the ... Reopning of assessment - Capital gain computation - addition to the sale consideration for the purpose of computing capital gains under section 50C - Section 50C retrospective effect - Held that:- Provisos to Section 50C being effective from 1st April 2003. This is precisely what the learned counsel has prayed for. In his detailed written submissions, he has made out of a strong case for the amendment to Section 50C being treated as retrospective and with effect from 1st April 2003. The plea of the assessee is indeed well taken and deserves acceptance. What follows is this. The matter will now go back to the Assessing Officer. In case he finds that a registered agreement to sell, as claimed by the assessee, was actually executed on 29.6.2005 and the partial sale consideration was received through banking channels, the Assessing Officer, so far as computation of capital gains is concerned, will adopt stamp duty valuation, as on 29.6.2005, of the property sold as it existed at that point of time. In case the assessee is not content with this value being adopted under section 50C, he will be at liberty to seek the matter being referred to the DVO for valuation, again as on 29.6.2005, of the said property. As a corollary thereto, the subsequent developments in respect of the property sold (e.g. the conversion of use of land) are to be ignored. It is on this basis that the capital gains will be recomputed. With these directions, the matter stands restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication de novo, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee and by way of a speaking order Issues Involved:1. Validity of the addition of Rs. 15,60,900 to the sale consideration for computing capital gains under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Applicability of amendments to Section 50C, introduced by the Finance Act 2016, with retrospective effect.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the Addition of Rs. 15,60,900 to the Sale Consideration:The assessee challenged the correctness of the order dated 21st January 2013, passed by the learned CIT(A), which upheld the addition of Rs. 15,60,900 to the sale consideration for computing capital gains under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2008-09. The case involved a reopened assessment where the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee, along with a co-owner, sold land at Village Behstan, Surat, for Rs. 45,00,000 on 24.04.2007. However, the stamp duty valuation authority valued the land at Rs. 76,21,800 on the same date. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 15,60,900 to the sale consideration based on the stamp duty valuation to compute capital gains. The assessee argued that the sale deed was executed on 24.04.2007 due to the need to convert agricultural land to non-agricultural land, and the relevant valuation should be as of the date of the agreement to sell (29.06.2005). This explanation was rejected by the Assessing Officer, who adopted the stamp duty valuation as of the date of the sale deed. The CIT(A) upheld this decision, leading to the current appeal.2. Applicability of Amendments to Section 50C with Retrospective Effect:The fundamental purpose of Section 50C is to counter the suppression of sale consideration on the sale of immovable properties. The section presumes that the stamp duty valuation represents the market price of the property sold. However, there can be a significant gap between the agreement to sell and the execution of the sale deed, leading to discrepancies in valuation. The Income Tax Simplification Committee, headed by Justice R V Easwar, recognized this issue and proposed amendments to Section 50C, which were introduced by the Finance Act 2016, effective from 1st April 2017. These amendments allow the stamp duty valuation on the date of the agreement to sell to be considered for computing capital gains, provided the consideration was received through banking channels on or before the date of the agreement.The Government recognized the hardship caused by the previous provisions and introduced the amendments to provide relief. However, the amendments were prospective, effective from 1st April 2017, and did not provide relief to the assessee for earlier periods. The Tribunal held that amendments to remove undue hardship or incongruity should be treated as retrospective. This view was supported by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Ansal Landmark Township Pvt Ltd and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs Alom Extrusion Ltd, which held that curative amendments should be retrospective.The Tribunal concluded that the provisos to Section 50C should be treated as retrospective and effective from 1st April 2003, the date when Section 50C was introduced. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to verify if a registered agreement to sell was executed on 29.06.2005 and if partial sale consideration was received through banking channels. If verified, the Assessing Officer should adopt the stamp duty valuation as of 29.06.2005 for computing capital gains. The subsequent developments in the property should be ignored, and the capital gains recomputed accordingly.Conclusion:The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, considering the retrospective applicability of the amendments to Section 50C. The Tribunal emphasized that the amendments were intended to provide relief and should not result in a higher tax burden on the taxpayers. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 30th September 2016.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found