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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2024 (9) TMI 955 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Allotment date determines holding period for LTCG calculation, not payment installments or sale deed execution timing ITAT Mumbai held that for determining holding period and LTCG, the allotment date is paramount, with subsequent acts like payment installments and sale ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                            Allotment date determines holding period for LTCG calculation, not payment installments or sale deed execution timing

                            ITAT Mumbai held that for determining holding period and LTCG, the allotment date is paramount, with subsequent acts like payment installments and sale deed execution being consequential. The tribunal directed AO to consider stamp duty value as Rs. 1,88,00,000 versus sale consideration of Rs. 1,75,00,000 as on 22.12.2014. The assessee's 1/3rd share of the difference (Rs. 13,00,000) was to be added under "Income from other sources" per section 56(2)(x). Following consistency principle from daughter's case, the appeal was partly allowed with modified addition.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Consideration of the allotment letter as an agreement fixing the sale price.
                            2. Applicability of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
                            3. Determination of the date of acquisition for capital gain purposes.
                            4. Consistency in the treatment of similar cases.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Consideration of the Allotment Letter as an Agreement Fixing the Sale Price
                            The Assessee purchased a residential house for Rs. 1,75,00,000 during the assessment year 2020-21. The value of the property as per the Stamp Duty Authority was Rs. 2,76,29,333. The Assessee provided an allotment letter dated 29.01.2011 from M/s. Spark Builders and Infra Project Ltd., showing a total consideration of Rs. 1,75,00,000 and an advance payment of Rs. 10,00,000.

                            The Assessing Officer (AO) did not accept this claim and added Rs. 33,76,444 as the Assessee's share of the difference between the stamp duty value and the consideration paid. The Ld. Commissioner upheld this addition, rejecting the allotment letter as an agreement fixing the sale price, citing that the letter did not constitute a binding agreement.

                            However, the Tribunal found that the allotment letter dated 22.12.2014, along with the bank statement reflecting the advance payment and the sale deed dated 06.11.2019, should be considered for determining the stamp duty value. The Tribunal referenced the case of PCIT-3 Vs. Vembo Vaidyanathan (2019) 261 taxman 376 (Bom.), where the court upheld the acquisition of property from the date of the allotment letter.

                            2. Applicability of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
                            The Ld. Commissioner noted that the difference between the stamp duty value and the sale consideration was more than 5%, making Section 56(2)(x) applicable. The Tribunal, however, emphasized that the date of the allotment letter should be considered for stamp duty valuation under this section. The Tribunal cited various judgments, including Ms. Madhu Kaul Vs. CIT, Chandigarh, where it was held that the allotment letter conferred a right to hold the property, making subsequent actions like payment of installments and delivery of possession consequential.

                            3. Determination of the Date of Acquisition for Capital Gain Purposes
                            The Tribunal highlighted that the date of the allotment letter should be considered for determining the holding period of the property and for the valuation of stamp duty under Section 56(2)(x). This was supported by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Ms. Madhu Kaul Vs. CIT, where it was determined that the allotment letter conferred a right to the property, and subsequent actions were consequential.

                            4. Consistency in the Treatment of Similar Cases
                            The Tribunal noted that a similar case involving the Assessee's daughter, Ms. Sanika Sawant, was decided by the then Ld. CIT(A), who considered the allotment letter as an agreement for fixing the amount and allowed the claim. The Tribunal emphasized the rule of consistency and directed the AO to follow the same approach.

                            The Tribunal directed the AO to consider the stamp duty value as on 22.12.2014 as Rs. 1,88,00,000 and the sale consideration as Rs. 1,75,00,000. The difference of Rs. 13,00,000 should be added under the head "Income from other sources," consistent with the treatment in the case of the Assessee's daughter.

                            Conclusion
                            The appeal of the Assessee was partly allowed. The AO was directed to consider the stamp duty value as on 22.12.2014 and add 1/3 of the difference between the stamp duty value and the sale consideration to the Assessee's income under "Income from other sources." The Tribunal emphasized the importance of consistency and the relevance of the allotment letter in determining the stamp duty value and the date of acquisition.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found