2013 (12) TMI 904

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') was issued to the assessee on 26-07-2005. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is co-owner of land and building situated at No. 22, Sardar Patel Road, Chennai along with his mother and brother. All the co-owners entered into a Joint Development Agreement with M/s. Arihant Foundations and Housing Ltd., on 02-08-2000 for the construction of commercial complex at the aforementioned site. The mother of the assessee relinquished her share in the property in favour of her two sons i.e., the assessee and his brother vide Deed of Settlement dated 03-04-2002. As per the terms and conditions of the development agreement, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cted in the registered document. The ld.DR prayed for setting aside the impugned order. 4. On the other hand, Shri Jayakumar, appearing on behalf of the assessee supporting the order of the CIT(Appeals) submitted that the transaction pertains to the period when the provisions of Section 50C were not in force. The ld. AR further contended that when the provisions of Section 50C are not applicable, then the value as per the appropriate authority cannot be ignored. The ld.AR relied on the third Member decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. P.R.Chockalingam reported as 135 ITD 75 (Chennai) (TM). 5. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of both the sides and have also perused the orders of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....OC by the Appropriate Authority on 21-2-2000. To repeat again, the original agreement of sale was executed on 28-6-1996. The Appropriate Authority had issued the NOC on the basis of that agreement on 8-10-1996 itself. Thereafter the circumstances warranted to revise the agreement twice, one for restating the actual extent of the property and the other for restating the negotiated consideration of sale. The assessee had filed revised applications for NOC before the Appropriate Authority on both occasions when the original agreement was restated. Meanwhile, the possession was also handed over to the buyers and the consideration was also received from them. Therefore, it is necessary to consider all these events as inseparable segments of a si....