TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1104
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e find that the assessee had signed the memo of appeal and grounds on 13/2/2018 and therefore, due to the holiday on 13/2/2018 of the State Government and on 14/2/2018 of the Central Government, the appeal was filed only on 15/2/2018 resulting the delay of one day in filing the appeal. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal of one day in filing the appeal. 4. In the present appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. That the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in holding that on the date of the agreement with regard to the sale of the property the seller himself was not the owner of the property and so could not have passed it on to the assessee and the entries in the sale had also established that the promoter has handed over actual possession of the said plot of land to the buyer. The said finding is illegal and unjustified. 2. That the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in holding that transaction regarding purchase of property situated at B-29, Sushant City, Kalwar Road, Jaipur has to be considered for assessment year 2014-15 and provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) would be applicable and confirming the addition made by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....property in question was purchased vide agreement dated 28/3/2013 on the ground that on the date of agreement the seller himself was not the owner of the property and therefore, he could not have passed it to the assessee. The ld AR has referred to the details of the allotment of the property by Ansal Township and Land Development Ltd. in favour of the seller and submitted that the entire payment for property situated at B-29, Sushant City, Kalwar Road, Jaipur was made up to 02/4/2008 when the possession was given to the allottee. He has referred to the details of the payments and possession letter issued by Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. at page 11 of the paper book. He has further contended that even otherwise as per agreement dated 15/9/2003, the seller acquired the property in question from Ansal Township and land Development Ltd. thereafter the payment as per the schedule annexed to the agreement was paid and hence even if the sale of the property was executed on 26/4/2013 in favour of the seller, the right of the seller in the said property was otherwise exists and vested in favour of the allottee and mere registration of sale deed would not change the right and own....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecognized as the date of transfer provided the consideration is paid on the date of agreement by mode other than the cash hence if the consideration is paid by the assessee other than the cash then only the agreement of earlier date can be existed as the date of transfer not otherwise. In the case in hand, the assessee has claimed to have paid the part consideration of Rs. 4.00 lacs in cash, which is hit by second proviso to Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act and therefore for the purpose of said Section, the date of transaction will be considered when the sale deed was registered. He has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The assessee has claimed to have purchased the property in question being B-29, Sushant City, Kalwar Road, Jaipur from one Shri Nav Naresh Jhanwar vide agreement dated 28/3/2013. The copy of the said agreement is placed at page No. 1 and 2 of the paper book. Though the said agreement is not registered but only attested by the Notary, however, the payment of part sale consideration on 28/3/2013 is duly mentioned in the sale deed dated 26/4/2013. The Assessing Offi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er" on the day of the registry Thus the transaction has to be considered for A.Y. 2014-15 & provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) would be applicable, the addition made is confirmed. Ground of appeal is dismissed." Thus, it is clear that the ld. CIT(A) declined to accept the claim on the ground that the seller did not have the right to deal with the immovable property as an owner on the date of agreement dated 28/3/2013 and accordingly treated the transaction took place only when the sale deed was registered on 26/4/2013. We find that as per the agreement to sell dated 15/9/2013 between the Ansal Township and Land Development Pvt. Ltd. and Nav Naresh Jhanwar, the said property was agreed upon to be sold to the allottee subject to the payments as per the schedule annexed to the said agreement. The ld AR has filed the statement of the payment by the allottee and it is clear that the allottee of the said property had already made the entire payment of consideration to Ansal Township and Land Development Pvt. Ltd, subsequently known as Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd.. Thus, in view of the fact that there was an agreement between the parties and in pursuant to the said agre....