TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 233
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this appeal of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of short term capital gain made by AO on account of transfer of development rights amounting to Rs. 1,25,68,000/-. For this Revenue has raised following two grounds: - "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and ill the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,25,68,000/- made on account of short term capital gain on transfer of development rights ignoring the fact that the assessee himself has admitted that he has received Rs. 6 1,80,732/- for the plot from MIs. V K Developers. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. C 11(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,25,68.000/- made on account of short t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee filed lease deed dated 09-03-1988 executed by the assessee with the lessor which merely gives the rights and subsequently is consent term decree dated 17-08-2004 filed in the Civil Court, wherein Consent Terms were recorded by the court which reads as under: - "Consent Terms 1. Agreed, declared and confirmed that the writing lease deed, dated 9th March, 1988 is valid, subsisting and binding upon the Legal heirs of late. AUSTIL PASCAL CONSALVES and so also the Defenders herein. 2. Agreed, declared and confirmed that the writing Lease Deed was executed with an intention to develop the property by the Plaintiff at his own costs and expenses and the rights though not referred in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 21-09-2007 in its paper book which is clearly a rectification deed and nothing else. Accordingly, the learned Counsel for the assessee argued that the right accrue on the date of joint agreement dated 21-09-2007 and not on rectification deed dated 21-09-2007, it means that the assessment has to be made in AY 2007-08 of the long term capital gain and not in AY 2008-09 as in the present case made by the AO. Without prejudice to the above, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that it is a long term capital gain in any case and it is to be in term of lease deed dated 09-03-1988 when the assessee has acquired this property and not on the rectification deed dated 21-09-2007. Accordingly, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ordingly, I hereby direct the AO to delete the additions made of Rs. 1,25,68,000 in the absence of any substantive evidences. This ground of appeal is allowed." 6. In view of the above facts and discussion carried out and the findings of CIT(A), we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition. We confirm the order of CIT(A) and this issue of Revenue's appeal is dismissed. 7. The next issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to deletion of disallowance made by AO on expenses on which no TDS was deducted under section 194J of the Act by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. For this Revenue contended that the CIT(A) admitted additional evidences without giving opportunity to the AO in contraven....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the level of the AO. Hence, we remit the issue back to the file of the AO for verification purpose only. Accordingly, this issue of Revenue's appeal is set aside and allowed for statistical purposes. 10. The next issue in this appeal of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of indirect expense of Rs. 1,54,817. For this Revenue has raised following ground No.4: - "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the U. CJT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,54,817/- made out of indirect expenses on adhoc basis ignoring the fact that assessee did not furnish any documentary evidence in support of the indirect expenses claimed by him." 11. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through....