Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether capital gains could be assessed in the hands of an assessee who signed the sale deed only as a consenting party and received no sale consideration, and whether the deeming mechanism under section 50C could justify such addition.
Analysis: The sale deed showed that the entire consideration was paid to the assessee's two brothers in equal shares, while the assessee received nothing from the transfer. The assessee's role as a consenting party was accepted on the record, and the brothers' affidavits as well as the bank details supported the absence of any receipt in her hands. In such circumstances, the taxable capital gain had to be examined on the basis of real income and the person who actually received the consideration. A deeming provision for valuation could not be used to fasten an income tax burden on a person to whom no real consideration accrued or was received.
Conclusion: The addition of capital gains in the assessee's hands was not sustainable and was deleted.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed because the transfer consideration had accrued to the brothers and not to the assessee, so no taxable capital gain could be assessed against her on these facts.
Ratio Decidendi: Capital gains cannot be assessed in the hands of a person who has not received or accrued any consideration from the transfer, and a deeming valuation provision cannot create taxable income where no real income exists in that person's hands.