TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 987
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appeals together and disposing the same by this common order. 2. The first issue arises for consideration is the market value of property as on 01.04.1981 for computation of capital gain. 3. Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessees, submitted that the assessees along with their brother Shri S.S.R. Ramadoss, sold 53,380 sq.ft. of land to M/s Himadri Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. for a total consideration of Rs. 5,18,23,000/- by means of a registered sale deed dated 30.10.2007. Out of the sale consideration, according to the Ld. counsel, the assessee in I.T.A. No.1931/Chny/2016 received Rs. 2,25,00,086/- towards his share. The assessee in I.T.A. No.1970/Chny/2016 received Rs. 20,00,000/-. The balance amount of Rs. 48,22,828/- was paid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....frontage of building was 178 ft. Having located in a prime location of Cuddalore, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer failed to consider the factors which were required to be considered for the purpose of estimating the valuation. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) is not correct in confirming the valuation made by the Assessing Officer. 4. On the contrary, Ms. M. Subashree, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the Assessing Officer after getting report from the Sub-Registrar, found that the value of the land as on 01.04.1981 is Rs. 1.38 per sq.ft. Since the Assessing Officer followed the value adopted by the Sub-Registrar for registration of property, according to the Ld. D.R., the CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the co-owners, it appears that the property is located in prime location of Cuddalore. The property appears to have been located on the eastern side of link road to railway over bridge and Cuddalore main bus stand. The Departmental Valuation Officer has also noted that it is located on the rear side of busy Lawrence Road and even in the year 1981, the Departmental Valuation Officer found that there was high potential for development of property as commercial campus / cinema theatres / Kalyana Mandapam, etc. The frontage of the building is admittedly 178 ft. By considering the nature of building, future development and potential for establishing commercial campus / cinema theatres, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the value....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R., for the purpose of claiming exemption under Section 54F of the Act, the assessees have to invest the capital gain in a new property. Since admittedly, the assessees spent the money for renovation of building, according to the Ld. D.R., the assessees are not eligible for exemption under Section 54F of the Act. 9. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The Assessing Officer found that the assessees renovated the existing building. Now the assessees claim before this Tribunal that they have put up an additional construction. The valuation report said to be filed by the assessees before the Assessing Officer indicates that the assessees spent the money for improving th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submitted that the assessees borrowed commercial loan by mortgaging the property along with co-owners. Under the scheme of Income-tax Act, according to the Ld. D.R., what is to be allowed is expenditure for sale of property. The property was mortgaged long back before the sale of property. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the loan said to be obtained from REPCO Bank is neither for purchase of property or for sale of property. Therefore, neither the loan amount nor the interest can be allowed while computing the capital gain. 13. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The assessees along with other co-owners appear to have borrowed loan from REPCO Bank, Pondicherr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and it was not handed over to the purchaser. Moreover, according to the Ld. counsel, no consideration was received from power of attorney agent also, therefore, there was no sale during the year under consideration. According to the Ld. counsel, execution of power of attorney in favour of third party for negotiating the sale cannot be considered to be sale of property within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Act. 16. We heard Ms. M. Subashree, the Ld. D.R. also. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessees have not produced any evidence to show that the possession of the property was handed over and sale proceeds were received on the date of sale. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the presumption is that the property was sold on the da....