TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 632
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r consideration, two properties of the said estate were sold at a consideration of Rs. 42,55,045/- and profit arising from the sale was declared by the assessee under the head "long term capital gain" in the return of income filed for the year under consideration. Consistent with the stand taken in the earlier year, the A.O. held that the profit arising from the sale of property was chargeable to tax under the head profits and gains from business or profession. He also found that the market value of the property sold by the assessee as per stamp duty authority was Rs. 5,95,78,500/-. When the assessee was asked by the A.O. to explain the vast difference between such market value and the sale consideration shown, it was explained by the assessee that the relevant sale agreements were made earlier in the year 1997 and 1999 and since the completion of sales had taken time because of the delay in obtaining the required permission from the Charity Commissioner and RBI and under UL (C&R) Act, there was a vast difference in the market value of the property. This explanation of the assessee was not found acceptable by the A.O. According to him, the value adopted by the stamp duty authority ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee. He submitted that although the property of the assessee agreed to be sold to Avadh Narayan Sing & Others on 12-3-1999 by accepting their offer in response to the tenders invited by the assessee on 12-3-1999 and the total consideration of Rs. 25 lacs was also received upto 3-5-1999, the conveyance deed could be executed only on 3-8-2004 for want of the approval from Charity Commissioner and clearance from ULC authority which took a lot of time. He submitted that similarly the another property of the assessee was agreed to be sold to Tarashankar B. Choubey on 6-10-1982 and even though the agreement was also executed on 7-2-1997 accepting part consideration of the same out of the total consideration of Rs. 29.04 lacs, the conveyance deed could be executed finally on 8-11-2004 as a result of delay in getting required clearance certificate from Income Tax Authorities u/s 230-A of the Act and the adjudication by the office of Superintendent of Stamps. He contended that the sale consideration of all these properties, however, was agreed at the time of original agreement and there is nothing to show that the assessee has received anything more than the consideration so agreed on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ement. He contended that similarly as per the first proviso to section 56- (2)(vii), where the date of agreement fixing the amount of consideration for the transfer of immovable property and the date of registration are not the same, the stamp duty value on the date of agreement is to be taken for the purposes of clause (vii) of sub-section 2 of section 56. He contended that these provisions specifically made in the statute clearly shows the legislative intention that where the date of agreement fixing the amount of consideration for a transfer of capital asset and the date of registration are not the same, the stamp duty value on the date of agreement should be taken. 6. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, strongly relied on the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) in support of the Revenue's case on this issue. He contended that the specific provisions as contained in section 43-CA(3) and 56(2)(vii) of the Act referred to by the ld. counsel for the assessee are not there in section 50-C of the Act and the same therefore cannot be relied upon or referred to while deciding the issue involved in the case of the assessee where section 50-C of the Act is applicable. He contended that for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... approval granted by the Charity Commissioner for a specific period was required to be extended and such extension was ultimately granted by Charity Commissioner only on 20-4-2004. Accordingly the final conveyance was executed on 3-8-2004. The delay in executing the final conveyance of the property thus was because of the delay in getting the required clearances from the concerned authorities, which was beyond the control of the assessee. Similarly, there was a delay in executing the conveyance of the other property agreed to be sold by the assessee to Tarashankar B. Choubey for which the agreement was executed on 7-2-1997 itself and even the consideration of Rs. 10 lacs was partly received by the assessee on the date of agreement itself. The conveyance deed, however, could be executed only on 8-11-2004 and this delay as explained by the assessee with reference to the sequence of events that occurred with the supporting evidence was beyond the control of the assessee. 9. In the case of M. Siva Parvathi & Ors (supra) relied upon by the ld. counsel for the assessee, a similar issue arose for the consideration of Visakhapatnam Bench of this Tribunal. In the said case, both the part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s no allegation of suppression of actual consideration. Accordingly, we delete the addition made by the A.O. and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of capital gain arising from transfer of properties of the assessee by applying the provisions of section 50-C of the Act and allow ground No. 1 of assessee's appeal. 11. As regards the issue raised in ground No. 2 relating to levy of interest u/s 234B and 234D, the ld. counsel for the assessee has sought only consequential relief. The A.O. is accordingly directed to allow consequential relief to the assessee on this issue. 12. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14-08-2013. ============= Document 1 Tarashankar B. Choubey Page Nos Date Particulars 6-10-1982 We write to Choubey that we agree to enter into an agreement for sale for land admeasuring 20 acres at Rs. 30/- per sq. yd. in the event BMC returning possession of land. 1 6-10-1982 6-10-1982 We appoint him as Security Agent for protection of lands on payment of Rs. 2-3 25,000- per month Choubey confirms the terms 4 17-4-1984 30-5-1985 BMC returns possession of la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Final Indenture of Conveyance for the purpose of getting stamped given to Choubey 69-71 72-73 15-9-2000 Choubey's Advocate confirms the receipt of the indenture of conveyance and states that the same has been submitted to the Office of Superintendent of Stamps for adjudication. 74-75 3-10-2000 We make application to Income Tax Authority for certificate u/s 230-A Joint CIT, Special Range 40, forwards certificate u/s 230a 76-79 80 13-10-2000 7-3-2001 We remind Choubey's Advocate Pandey about progress getting the conveyance stamped. 4-4-2001 Advocate Pandey writes to us that he will get the documents stamped in the next week. 81 82-83 28-6-2001 Choubey writes to us that the document which was forwarded for adjudication | 84 with the Authority has been misplaced and requests us to issue fresh Deed of Conveyance We again remind Choubey in the matter 30-6-2001 26-4-2002 12-10-2002 3*1-1-2003 We forwarded a Xerox copy of the Deed of Conveyance to Choubey We remind Choubey about conveyance to be stamped. 85 86 87 Choubey informs us that he was going to have the conveyance executed ....