TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 458
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owned by the assessee and her daughter. 3. Succinctly, the factual panorama of the case is that the assessee filed her return declaring loss of Rs. 81,60,800/- which was claimed as long term capital loss arising from transfer of a flat at Raheja Woods. Such flat was sold for a sum of Rs. 1.00 crore with indexed cost of acquisition determined at Rs. 1,81,60,800/- resulting into long term capital loss of Rs. 81,60,800/-. The Assessing Officer, after examining the sale deed as well as the purchase deed of the property transferred, observed that the assessee was a co-owner of the property and not the sole owner. On being show-caused, the assessee submitted that full investment in purchase of flat at Raheja Woods was made by her after selling ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d again referring to the assessee and her daughter as sellers, is available at page 44 of the paper book. Payment at the time of purchase of property came from a bank account which was jointly operated by the assessee and her daughter. Similarly, at the time of sale of the property, the sale consideration went back into a bank account jointly operated by the assessee and her daughter. These facts evidently demonstrate that Tricia Batliwala was joint owner along with the assessee at the time of purchase as well as the sale. The contention put forth on behalf of the assessee that she included the name of her daughter in the purchase as well as sale deeds only for ensuring that the property gets easily transferred to Tricia Batliwala after he....