TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 1544
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder passed under s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 27/12/2011 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : "1.1 That the Learned Honorable CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 56,65,900/- made by the Assessing Officer as a short term capital gain. 1.2 That the various reasons advanced by ld.CIT(A) in confirming the addition are contrary to the facts of the case and evidence on record. The appellant respectfully submits that in view of various submissions made by the appellant, the addition of Rs. 56,65,900 should be deleted. 1.3 The appellant respectfully submits that the property under issue is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....saction on account of sale of such agriculture land has been duly recorded in the individual account of Shri Rajesh P. Shah being karta of HUF. However, the PAN of the HUF was wrongly mentioned in the sale deed. The assessee in support of his claim enclosed copy of sale deed as well as copy of bank statement where sale consideration of Rs. 56,65,900/- was deposited in the account of Rajesh P. Shah. The assessee also submitted that the payment for the purchase of such land was also made by the individual account of Shri Rajesh P. Shah. Therefore, there is no question of working the short term capital gain in the hands of the assessee. 6. However, the AO disregarded the contention of the assessee by observing as under: i. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....city for Rs. 1,57,10,000/- and accordingly the deduction was claimed u/s 54B of the Act. 9. However, the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings observed certain facts as detailed under: i. Shri Rajesh P. Shah and his brother have not disclosed any capital gain income in their individual income tax return. ii. Payment for the purchase of such agriculture land was made through HUF account. The sale proceeds was deposited by the assessee in the individual accounts of Rajesh P. Shah and his brother. But the deposit of sale proceeds does make Rajesh P shah as owner of the land. In view of above, the Ld. CIT(A) disregarded the contention of the assessee and confirmed the order of AO by observing as under: "(B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of payment in purchase deed of this purported land at cl.10 clearly mentioned that funds were given by appellant and another co-purchaser HUF. It is therefore there is no mistake as contended by appellant but the same is deliberate not to reflect such transactions. When such transactions came into light, such kind of unsubstantiated contentions were submitted by appellant. I am inclined with A.O. that by depositing sale amount in individual account does not give ownership to individual when both purchase and sale deed clearly reflect the appellant as co-owner. The deposit of sale consideration is in the nature of application of sale consideration and has no further interpretation, least evidence of ownership. It is therefore AO is justifi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elow. 11. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The issue in the instant case relates whether the capital gain arose on account of sale of agriculture land is taxable in the hands of the assessee or Shri Rajesh P. Shah in his individual capacity. The undisputed fact is that there was transaction for purchase and sale of agriculture land which resulted capital gain income of Rs. 56,65,900/- only. 12. On perusal of income tax return of Shri Rajesh P. Shah, it was observed that the amount of capital gain income was duly reflected as evident from the statement of income, which is placed on Page 17 of the Paper Book. The relevant statement of the income is reproduced below: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Journal 53 1,53,791.80 1,64,500.00 18,59,343.57 Dr Closing Balance 16,94,843.57 18,59,343.57 18,59,343.57 From the foregoing discussion, we note that the addition was made by the AO in the hands of the assessee on account of short term capital gain of Rs. 56,65,900/- on the ground that Shri Rajesh P. Shah has not disclosed the same in his individual return. However, on perusal of the income tax return of Shri Rajesh P. Shah, it was observed that the amount of capital gain income has been duly reflected in his return of income. It was also observed that the assesse....