2018 (2) TMI 1761

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 was filed on 02/09/2008 declaring income of Rs. 5,06,440/-. After processing the said return of income u/ 143(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the assessment was re-opened by issuance of notice u/s 148 on 30/12/2011. After receipt of said notice u/s 148 the assessee submitted that the original return of income filed may be treated as return filed in response to notice u/s 148. Subsequently the assessment was completed by the Income tax Officer, Ward 5(4), Bangalore, vide order dated 25/03/2013 passed u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act" for short) at total income of Rs. 4,78, 74,340/-. While doi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t the lower authorities were not justified in not reckoning/ignoring the agreement dated 28/06/2000 entered with Mr.Gopal to purchase the said property in consideration of services rendered by him in connection with proposed acquisition of the property by the Bangalore Development Authorities. He submitted that the assessee had entered into another supplementary agreement dated 01/06/2004 by virtue of which the assessee acquired interest in the property which was subject matter of joint development agreement. It was further submitted that the sale deed was executed on 05/02/2005 by virtue of which the assessee became absolute owner of the property. According to the learned authorized representative, the date on which the assessee entered in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ITO vs. Avinash Prabhakar Hegde (TS-6733-ITAT-2016) (Bang). On the other hand, the learned departmental Representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We heard rival submissions of the parties and considered material on record. The issue in the present appeal is whether the gains arising on entering into joint development agreement is taxable under short term capital gains or long term capital gains. It must be stated here that the assessee is not challenging the eligibility to capital gains tax on entering into JDA. The bone of contention between assessee and revenue is only with regard to the holding period of property which is subject matter of JDA between assessee and M/s.Adarsh Developers. It is contended before....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ered is the date of registration of sale deed that is 5/12/2005. The decisions in the case of Sanjeev Lal (supra) and M.Syamal Rao (supra) relied upon by the ld.AR of the assessee, do not come to the aid of the assessee as the facts of those decisions are materially different. In the said decisions, full consideration was paid by the buyer and possession of the property was handed over to the buyer by the seller. In such circumstances, courts have held that even on entering into agreement of sale property, rights in said asset is extinguished and the buyer should be deemed to be the owner of the asset from the date of agreement of sale. Therefore, gains arising out of entering into joint development agreement are assessable as 'short term c....