TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 670
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal: ITA No.77/Bang/2017 1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), in so far as it is against the appellant is against law, facts of the case and weight of evidence. 2. The Learned Appellate Officer has erred in not deciding the various other issues raised under Ground No 4, and as also 6 and Additional Ground regarding claim u/s 54G. And the said grounds are mentioned here in below for the sake of clarity. a) Ground No 4 The learned AO has erred in computing the "indexed cost of sale at Rs. 41,23,270/ as against Rs. 1,90,41,525/- as claimed by appellant and accepted by AO earlier. b) Ground No 6 The learned AO ought to have deleted LTCG income of Rs. 86, 85,618/- as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee's share of constructed area, because the assessee would receive constructed area in lieu of the land share, 3. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that for the purpose of capital gain computation, value of land as on the date of JDA i.e., 5/10/2005 is to be taken and not the cost of construction of super built-up area to be received, as the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of So/am International Lid. (386 1TR 580) (lid. 13105/2016 has held that the expression 'accruing' as used in section 48 is synonymous to entitlement and if the assessee is entitled to the consideration, then the same must be taken into account for the purposes of computation of capital gains in terms of section 48. 4. For these....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nataka High Court in case of Dr.D.K.Dayalu and also decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Sh.Chaturbhuj Dwarkadas Kapadia, reported in 260 ITR. 5. It was noticed by Ld.AO that assessee had not declared any capital gains pursuant to such JDA and accordingly, notice under section 148 was issued and served upon assessee, in response to which, assessee vide letter dated 13/02/2013 informed that, return of income filed on 29/11/2006 to be treated as return filed in response to notice under section 148. 6. Assessee was thereafter intimated reasons recorded for initiating proceedings under 147, vide letter dated 14/02/2013 and subsequently, notices under section 142 (1) was issued to assessee calling for various details. In respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee had placed reliance upon decision by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of Ved Prakash Rakhra. 10. Ld.AO after considering submissions, was of opinion that, facts in case of Ved Prakash Rakhra was distinguishable, and their by, rejected claim of assessee. Ld.AO thus, computed capital gains in hands of assessee amounting to Rs. 4,08,13,070/- for year under consideration. 11. Aggrieved by addition made by Ld.AO, assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A). Before Ld.CIT(A) assessee raised additional ground to allow deduction under section 54G in respect of new unit set up at Nelamangala, costing Rs. 15crores. Ld.CIT(A) held that, for purposes of capital gain computation, value of land as on the rate of JDA that is 05/10/2005 is to....