Tribunal allows appeal, directs full claim approval, considers pre-sale deed payments as evidence

The tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the case to the AO for further verification and consideration in accordance with the law. The tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument regarding the restriction on improvements, directing the AO to allow the entire claim. Additionally, the tribunal admitted evidence of pre-sale deed payments, considering them indicative of an oral agreement between the parties. The tribunal determined that provisions of section 50C should be applied based on the date of the oral agreement, providing relief to the appellant.

---

---

Issues:
- Appeal against CIT (A)'s order for A.Y 2012-13
- Dismissal of grounds against initiation of proceedings u/s.147
- Adoption of rate invoking provisions of Sec.50C
- Dismissal of additional ground on the legal position of agreement
- AO's restriction on improvements to Rs. 5,00,000

Analysis:
1. The appeal pertains to the A.Y 2012-13 against the order of the CIT (A) confirming the AO's decision. The assessee raised several grounds of appeal challenging the order on various aspects.

2. The CIT (A) dismissed the grounds against the initiation of proceedings u/s.147. The assessee contended that the notice u/s.148 was issued prematurely, but the CIT (A) upheld the AO's decision. However, the assessee chose not to press this ground during the hearing.

3. The appellant raised an additional ground seeking to adopt the rate invoking provisions of Sec.50C. The contention was that the SRO value on the date of the agreement should be considered, not on the date of the sale deed. The CIT (A) rejected this ground, leading to the appeal before the tribunal.

4. Another additional ground was raised on the legal position that an agreement can be oral, supported by the payment of advances through cheques. The CIT (A) dismissed this ground, which was contested by the appellant.

5. The AO restricted the improvements claimed to Rs. 5,00,000, which the CIT (A) confirmed. The appellant argued that the AO lacked technical expertise to determine the value of the structure and that the improvements were decades old. The tribunal found merit in this argument and directed the AO to allow the entire claim of improvement.

6. During the hearing, the appellant presented evidence that part of the sale consideration was received before the execution of the sale deed. The tribunal admitted this additional evidence, considering the payments made by cheques as indicative of an oral agreement between the parties.

7. The tribunal relied on precedents and legislative amendments to determine that the provisions of section 50C should be applied based on the date of the oral agreement. Considering the evidence presented and legal interpretations, the tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes and remanded the case to the AO for further verification and consideration in accordance with the law.

8. The tribunal's decision was pronounced in an open court on 29th September 2017, providing relief to the appellant based on the detailed analysis and legal interpretations presented during the proceedings.

---