TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT allows appeal, rules on capital gains tax and section 50C applicability in land sale</h1> <h3>Heritage Foods (India) Ltd. Versus Income-tax Officer, Hyderabad</h3> Heritage Foods (India) Ltd. Versus Income-tax Officer, Hyderabad - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance of capital expenditure.2. Taxability of capital gain arising from the sale of land and applicability of section 50C.Issue 1: The Assessee raised four grounds in the appeal, including the disallowance of Rs. 2,26,54,471 as capital expenditure. However, during the hearing, Ground No. 1 was withdrawn by the Assessee. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 pertained to the capital gain arising from the sale of land and the invocation of section 50C of the IT Act. The Assessee contended that the capital gain should not be taxed in AY 2007-08 and requested its assessment in AY 2008-09.Issue 2: The Assessee entered into agreements for the sale of land on 31-03-2006 but received substantial amounts in FY 2006-07. The agreements were not registered initially, and fresh agreements were made on 07-01-2008, which were registered on the same day. The Assessing Officer (AO) invoked section 50C and re-determined the sale price based on stamp valuation. The Assessee argued that section 50C should not apply as the initial agreements were not registered. The ITAT held that since the agreements were not registered, section 50C could not be invoked. The ITAT also noted that the amendment to the Act from 01-10-2009 clarified that unregistered transactions were not covered under section 50C. Therefore, the addition under section 50C was deleted.Furthermore, the ITAT considered the assessability of capital gains. The Assessee initially offered the capital gain in AY 2007-08 based on the earlier agreements. However, revised agreements were made on 07-01-2008, and the Assessee contended that the capital gains should be taxed in AY 2008-09. The ITAT agreed with the Assessee, stating that just because the Assessee admitted income in AY 2007-08 does not mean it should be assessed in that year if legally not assessable. The ITAT directed the AO to exclude the capital gains from AY 2007-08 and include them in AY 2008-09, as per the Assessee's request. The appeal was partly allowed with these directions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
