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>Appeal dismissed over property rights expenditure & section 50C application</h1> <h3>Smt. Farida Alladin Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax</h3> Smt. Farida Alladin Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of expenditure incurred for releasing property rights.2. Application of section 50C for determining market value of properties.Issue 1: Disallowance of Expenditure:The appeal challenged the disallowance of Rs. 25 lakhs expenditure incurred by the assessee to release property rights. The AO reopened assessment due to discrepancies in property sale value. The assessee argued the payment was to perfect title, hence part of acquisition cost. The CIT(A) upheld AO's decision, stating encumbrances by ancestors don't qualify as acquisition cost. Legal precedents were cited, emphasizing that payments to clear encumbrances are not part of acquisition cost. The ITAT concurred, citing judgments that affirmed the exclusion of encumbrances from acquisition cost. Thus, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the disallowance of the expenditure.Issue 2: Application of Section 50C:The AO applied section 50C to determine property market value at Rs. 95,11,180 against recorded Rs. 54 lakhs. The CIT(A) upheld AO's decision, stating transactions were registered post-enforcement of section 50C. The assessee argued transactions occurred before section 50C enforcement, citing a legal precedent. However, the CIT(A) found insufficient evidence to support the claim. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing lack of evidence to prove pre-enforcement transactions. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the application of section 50C to determine market value.In conclusion, the ITAT upheld the decisions of the CIT(A) on both issues, dismissing the appeal of the assessee in its entirety. The judgment highlighted the legal principles regarding the disallowance of expenditure related to encumbrances and the application of section 50C for determining property market value, emphasizing the importance of providing concrete evidence to support claims in tax assessments.
TaxTMI 