TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 43
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 38,05,558/- against which the assessee invested Rs. 36,00,000/- in bond issued by national highway authority of India and claimed deduction u/s. 54 EC of Rs. 35,30,058/- ( duly restricted) after taking benefit of indexation from 1980-81. On verification of submission made by the assessee, Sale deed of the land it is notice that during the F.Y. 2007-08 the assessee with others had sold urban Agriculture Land of Rs. 6,85,00,000/-. The assessee has requested to furnish the abstract of 7/12 in respect of sold land. The AR. of the assessee vide his letter dated 26.10.2010 submitted the copy of-sale deed as well as copy of 7/12 and also Form NO.6 i.e. the proof of ownership of the said land. The Form no 7/12 of the F.Y. 2006-07 generated through software of the Govt. of Guj'araf dated 07.08.2010 vide Sr. NO.3274052 and abstract of form 6 which was registered on 19.03.2007 vide Registry No. 6697 (Copies are forming part of the order hence enclosed with the assessment order). It is also noticed by the undersigned that Smt. Diwaliben Chunilal, W/o. Shri Chunilal Devidas was expired on 8.10.1992. After that, Shri Chunilal D. Patel, father of the assessee, who was expired on 10.5.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es as well as the show caused notice dated 15.11.2010 which were served upon him on the address mentioned on the return of income filed by the assessee for the A.Y. under consideration. The inspector of this office has been deputed for the service of the aforesaid notice which has been served accordingly. However, the assessee vide his submission dated 02.12.2010 which have been received by this office on 02.12.2010 in which the assessee asked for the adjournment for 3 to 4 days which has been granted and the hearing is reaffixed on 08.12.2010. In response to the said notice the asses sees vide his reply dated 09.12.2010 which have been submitted in the tapal of the office of the undersigned is reproduced as under: - The assessee has not denied for the proposed addition as per the sec. 48(iii) on which the show caused issued. The assessee is only objected in his reply dated 09.12.2010 regarding the year of acquiring the property and for that, the assessee now submitted further evidences like Form N0.6 dated 08.11.1983 vide entry No. 2940. In the said evidence, it is mentioned that, the assessee's name with the block number i.e. 308 C (308 ) is entered vide aforesaid form from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le deed it is very much cleared that, the ownership of the land is of only 5 (Five) persons. So the amount received on sale of the land is distributed among them only as per the proportionate shares. The assessee has having the share of 1/6th in the said property. So the assessee has taken plea .that, the amount received from the total sale proceeds and invested by his family members are exempted u/s. 54 of the I.T Act is not correct, as the ownership of the property is belongs only to the assessee and not of his family members. So, the distribution' of the amount, amongst the family members before the making payment of LT.C.G. is not correct as per the Income fax Act. Moreover, the assessee shown the amount of sales consideration is a/so wrong. Looking to the share of the assessee in the land, the assessee has been received of Rs. 1,14,16,667/-( 1/6th share of Rs..6,85,00,000/-) where in the reply the assessee mentioned that he alongwith his family members has received Rs. 1,13,95,000/-, Therefore, there is no doubt about the share of the assessee in the sale property ie 1/6th share. Where the assessee has having one sixth (1/6th) share in the sale then there will not be any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tween the appellant and his two sons in accordance with the principles of Hindu Law. Thus, the appellant had rightly claim 18th share in this property. If may be noted that both the other co-owners, Shri Jagdish Patel and Shri Shailesh Patel are assessed to fax and have filed their return of income for A.Y. 2008-09 declaring the capital gain in respect of this property. The copy of statement of income with ack Are enclosed herewith. As regards the quantifications of capital gains, the appellant submits that AO has allowed exemption u/s 54EC in respect of investment in NHAI Capital Gains Bond for Rs. 36 lakh, however, when the entire 1 /6th share is to be taxed by AO in the hands of the appellant, the exemption claimed u/s 54 by the said two co-owners should also be allowed to the appellant. Shri Jaddish Patel has claimed investment in house property and CGS Bank Deposit, aggregating to Rs. 35,30,058 whereas Shri Shailesh Patel has claimed exemption u/s 54 and investment in NHAI totaling to Rs. 35,22,833/-. The same is evident from the computation of income enclosed. As a result, the computation of capital gains made by AO would get revised as under: Total sale consideration Rs. 1....