2013 (4) TMI 576

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Assessee reads as under:- 7. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to notice that the sale agreements with Shri Parasmal Jain and Smt. Gulab Bai Kothari were entered into by the assessee firm on the first day of the 'previous year i.e. 01.04.2000 and whatever be the dates of payment of consideration by them, rental income accrued to the buyers under the terms of the agreements from 01.04.2000 and the assessee was not liable to pay tax for the A.Y.2001-02 in respect of the same. 8. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have to appreciated that expect for Smt. Ratan Bai Kothari; the other creditors were all IT assesses and they have confirmed having lent the amounts in question. 9. The learned Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2001, the vendee would be able to enjoy the rent from the said premises only after March, 2001. Further, the Assessing Officer has noted that when the entire agreement is typed one, the date of agreement, i.e., 1st April 2000, is written in ink. As rightly pointed out by the Assessing Officer it is a clear device to evade the tax liability in the hands of the appellant by inserting clause 22 which saates that the intending seller is ready to pay the rent from 01.04.2000 to 31.03.2001 to the intending purchaser. In the case of Ch. Atchaiah (supra), the Hon'ble supreme Court held that merely because a wrong person is taxed with respect to a particular income, the Assessing Officer is not precluded from taxing the right person with respect to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erty is completed only when possession is handed over pursuant to agreement to sale. In the present case the assessee has stated that the agreement to sale has been entered into on 1.4.2000. Clause 22 in the agreement for sale provides that the intending seller is ready to pay the rent from 1.4.2000 to 31.3.2001 to the intending purchaser. There is also nothing on record to show that the purchaser was handed over possession on 1.4.2000. There is nothing on record to show that the tenant was aware of the change in ownership and had agreed for paying the rent to the intended purchaser. In fact the agreement for sale requires the vendor ( the Assessee herein) to obtain IT clearances and has also provided for obligation on the part of purchaser....