TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 70
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. Firstly, we take up the appeal filed by Shivram R. Bankar. As against 10 grounds raised in the original Memorandum of Appeal, the assessee has filed concise grounds running into four grounds, which have only one issue, which is being discussed hereinafter. Briefly, the facts are that a survey action u/s.133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called 'the Act') was carried out on 29-07-2013 in the case of Pharande Promoters and Builders, Pune, which is engaged in the business as Developers and Builders. During the course of survey action, it transpired that Pharande Promoters and Builders had entered into an Agreement with the assessee and his family members on 21-10-2011 for purchasing a land situated at Gat No.728 and 734 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hence the exemption was not available. The assessee has come up in appeal against such finding. 3. We have heard both the sides through virtual court and gone through the relevant material on record. A copy of Sale deed dated 21-10-2011 between Pharande Promoters and Builders and the family of the assessee has been placed at page 42 onwards of the paper book, which refers to the sale of the designated agricultural land. From such sale deed, it can be seen that it has been executed between Pharander Promoters and Builders on the one hand as buyer and 13 persons on the other which include close and extended family members of the assessee, who have been described as vendors. The extant assessee and the other assessee in this batch of appeals,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt, the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) is correct. Once the assessee is not entitled to exemption because he was not the owner of the property transferred, there can be no question of computing any capital gain in his hands from the transfer of the same property. 4. It is no doubt undisputed that the assessee did compute capital gain in his return of income and thereafter claimed exemptions u/ss.54B and 54F of the Act. Simply because such a computation of capital gain was made on an ill-advice, cannot bind the assessee for the times to come, if, in fact, he was not liable for such capital gain. As the proceedings in the first appeal are continuation of the assessment proceedings, there can be no impediment on the assessee in making a lawful ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... property at Rs. 21.50 lakh. 6. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. SITARAM R. BANKAR : 7. The facts of the case of Sh. Sitaram R. Bankar are mutatis mutandis similar to those of Sh. Shivram R Bankar, whose appeal has been disposed of hereinabove. Here also, the return was filed under misconception by computing capital gain and simultaneously claiming exemption u/ss.54B and 54F of the Act. The AO did not allow these exemptions for almost the similar reasons as assigned in the assessment of Shivram R Bankar. During the course of proceedings before the ld, CIT(A), the assessee lodged similar claim. The ld. CIT(A) recorded similar findings as in the case of Shivram R. Bankar that the assessee was not the owner of the property at ....