2013 (9) TMI 72

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee, even after the collaboration agreement dated 2.5.84 with M/s Ansal Properties and Industries Ltd. was to be valued at Rs.2,03,334/- as returned on the valuation date in accordance with the provisions of sec. 7(4) of the W.T. Act, 1957?        b) (i) Whether the Tribunal did not err in law in holding that the ownership in the property situate at 6, Aurengzeb Road was not transferred after the execution of the collaboration agreement dt. 2.5.84 with M/s Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd. and the assessee was liable to the W.T. Act, 1957?      (ii) Whether the Tribunal did not err in not accepting the legal claim that the only asset left in the hands of the assessee was the inter....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n by the Assessing Officer. 7. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and raised the following three contentions:-        (i) The petitioner had transferred the property and had ceased to be the co-owner of 6, Aurnagzeb Road, New Delhi as possession was transferred to Ansal Properties & Industries Private Limited.        (ii) In alternative and without prejudice to the contention No.(i), the petitioner was entitled to benefit of Section 7(4) of the Act and the property should be valued for the purpose of wealth tax at Rs. 2,03,334/.        (iii) The Assessing Officer had wrongly applied commercia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etter dated 2nd May, 1984, which has been filed in WTA No.2/2000 in the case of Siddhartha Pratap Chand (HUF) Vs. CWT. The said appeal pertains to assessment year 1992-93. We have examined the said letter and are of the opinion that this letter does not result in transfer of property or title. It only permits and allows the promoter builder to construct multi storeyed residential complex on the property at their own cost from their own resources. It provides for sharing of the built up area, basement, parking space, etc. after construction. Another important clause states that a formal agreement shall be executed subsequently and the promoter builder would pay Rs.15 lacs as interest free security deposit on being given vacant possession of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....used by the assessee for residential purpose throughout the period of 12 months immediately preceding the valuation date. The assessee himself has stated that he had surrendered and transferred actual physical possession of the property to the promoter builder. Thus, the petitioner assessee was not using the property, i.e. the asset exclusively for residential purpose. The tribunal has recorded that the construction existing on the property except for the two rooms was demolished in the year 1985 i.e. before the valuation date in the present cases, which relate to the assessment years 1987-88 to 1992-93. 14. Possession of substantial portion of the property had been handed over to the promoter builder, who was constructing the same during ....