TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 1080
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner(Appeals) erred in computing long-term capital gain of Rs. 50,86,932/- on impugned sale of flat though the transfer of the said flat was not complete as clause 11 and 22 of Article of agreement dated 28 December 2007. (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in disallowing 476000/-out of total cost of improvement of Rs. 576000/-in respect of flat under reference while determining the long-term gain. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income for the relevant assessment year on 8th September 2008 declaring total income of Rs. 4,63,136/-. The assessing officer while framing assessment order noticed that as per AIR information the assessee sold a prop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Commissioner (Appeals) the action of assessing officer was sustained. Further aggrieved, by the order of Commissioner (Appeals) the assessee filed present appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned AR of the assessee and learned DR for the revenue and perused the material available on record. Ground No. 1 relates to computation of long-term capital gain on sale of flat. The learned AR of the assessee argued that the assessee sold a residential flat during the year under reference and earned profit, however, on account of default by purchases the sale remains incomplete. The assessee has taken legal action against the purchaser by filing a Civil Suit in the Bombay High Court. As the sale is not complete during the year, hence no capital g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... purchasers was given a credit of Rs. 3.5 lakh by the Society Realty flat in question situated and that the said amount should have been paid to the assessee instead of purchasers. The assessee has raised a dispute regarding the entitlement of said credit of Rs. 3.5 lakh before Hon'ble Bombay High Court. We have seen the order of Hon'ble Bombay High Court dated 8 October 2010. We have seen that the assessee has not disputed the execution of transfer deed. Even before the High Court while filing a petition or in the Arbitration the assessee not sought relief for rescinding the contract of sale/ transfer deed. The only dispute before the High Court and in Arbitration is related with description of money. Further, no dispute that assessee sold....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eipts. It was further argued that all these expenses were duly shown by assessee in the return of income. On the other hand the learned DR for the revenue supported the order of authorities below. The learned DR for the revenue further argued that there is no evidence on record to prove that assessee is regularly filing his balance-sheet before the revenue authorities. The entries shown by the assessee in his computation of income are self-serving statement. It was further argued that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has already given partial relief to the assessee. The assessee is not entitled for any further relief under this ground of appeal. 6. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and gone through the orders of auth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent on the cost of the flat shown in the balance-sheet and rejected the claim of assessee on the ground that one party did not reply and on another notice was not served. We have seen that learned Commissioner (Appeals) while considering this ground of appeal observed that the assessee has filed certain evidence by way of return of income and balancesheet for earlier years the case for assessment year 2003- 04 and 2007- 08 which allegedly shown the cost of flat at Rs. 11,53,434/- against Rs. 5,77,475/- adopted by assessing officer for computation of long-term capital gain in the assessment order. 7. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) further observed that merely reflecting the entry in accounts and the balance-sheet, it cannot be said that....