Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (11) TMI 1055

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-up assessee's appeal, vide which following grounds have been raised:- "1(a) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,04,238/- on account of suppression of sale proceeds of flat which was higher than the value of determined by the Stamp Duty Valuation Authority. 1(b) On the facts and the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the consideration received on sale of flat was higher as compared to stamp duty valuation and there was no reason to disbelieve the actual consideration received and resort to other sale instance in arriving at erroneous conclusion of suppression of sales. 1(c) On the facts and circumstances of the case the condition and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....two flats sold in the first transaction and accordingly worked out the short-term-capital-gain of Rs. 3,04,238/- in the following manner:- Total Sale consideration Rs. 73,00,000 Rs. 60 lacs shown by assessee and Rs. 13 lacs estimated as suppression   Less: Expenses on transfer Rs. 72,750   Rs. 72,27,250 Less: Total cost of acquisition as given by the assessee Rs. 69,23,012 Short Term Capital Gain Rs. 3,04,238 3. The Ld. CIT(A), upheld the action of the Assessing Officer on the ground that, no convincing explanation has been filed by the assessee for selling second transaction of the flats at a lower price than the earlier transaction of the two flats. 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....perused the relevant finding given in the impugned orders as well as material placed on record. The assessee had purchased four flats in one building from M/s Nirmal Life Styles. The date of agreement for purchase, purchase consideration, date of sale, sale consideration and value as per the Stamp valuation of the four flats are as under:- S No. Flat No./ Area Date of Purchase Purchase Price in Rs. As Per Agreement Date of Sale Sale price in Rs. as per Agreement FMV as per Stamp Duty Valuation (Rs.) 1 305 441 Sq. ft. 17.4.2005 14,90,000 24.06.2009 36,50,000 53,55,210 2 306 519 Sq. ft. 17.4.2005 17,50,000 24.06.2009 36,50,000 3 303 525 Sq. ft. 02.8.2006 29,60,784 14.0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsequently should be taken at the same price on which two flats were sold 20 days earlier. Thus, the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of short-term-capital-gain of Rs. 3,04,238/- is deleted and sale consideration shown by the assessee as per the sale agreement of the two flats, viz. flat no. 303 and 304 is to be taken as such. Accordingly, ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 7. Now, we will take-up revenue's appeal, vide which various grounds have been raised with regard , firstly, denial of benefit under section 54(1); secondly, addition of Rs. 3,04,328/- on account of Stamp duty valuation; and lastly, Rs. 5 lakhs on account of unsecured loans. 8. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel submitted that, the tax effect on....