TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 555
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... total income of Rs. 1,60,22,490/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed under section 143(3) vide order dated 23.12.2009 and the total income was determined at Rs. 2,61,59,749/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) vide order dated 29.03.2011 dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Assessee is now in appeal before us and has raised the following ground:- 1. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VI, Ahmedabad has erred in law as well as on facts of the case by confirming the disallowance made by Assessing Officer of Banakhat Cancellation Charges of Rs. 11,47,282/- as cost of acquisition of land. 4. During the course o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ainst the Assessee by holding as under:- 5. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below and also the judgments cited by the learned AR of the assessee. We find that as per clause-5 of the banakhat agreement, copy of which is available at page no.52 of the paper book, the title clearance certificate and also the land possess marketable way will be obtained by the party of the second part i.e. buyer and not the assessee. As per clause-6 of the agreement, in case of non-execution of sale deed/conveyance agreement, and if any expenses is required to be incurred on this count, the same should be borne by the party of the second part i.e. the purchaser not by the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of land, which has been added in the computation of capital gain in total acquisition cost. Regarding the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the assessee in the case of Shakuntala Kantilal (supra), we find that this judgment is not applicable to the present case because the facts are different. In this case, the seller did not execute agreement and buyer filed a suit against the seller in Bombay High Court for specific performance, and it was the request before the Bombay High Court that either seller should be asked to perform the agreement for sale or in the alternative, compensation should be granted to the buyer and in these facts, the seller agreed to pay the compensation to the buyer and such compensation was allowed to be ded....