TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 350
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1/12/2017 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-13(3)(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). 2. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition made on account of sale consideration of property amounting to Rs. 44,63,434/- in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income for the A.Y.2015-16 on 30/09/2015 declaring total income of Rs. 12,84,79,720/-. The assessee is also a Director of Regal Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Further the assessee filed its revised return of income on 30/03/2017 declaring revised total income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tive Housing Society Ltd and all lease hold rights along with tenants were part of the purchase cost. On purchase of the plot, one becomes a member of the Nutan Laxmi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd and a member has number of rights attached to the plot such as being part of association, rights in getting priority in membership of various associations including right of membership of Juhu Gymkhana, concessional rights in hiring of plots for various occasions etc. b) All the parties viz., Shri Pratap Hirji Ved, Mrs. Krishna Pratap Ved, Shri Rajesh Pratap Ved (the assessee) and Mrs. Krupa R. Ved had entered into partnership to carry on business of development in name of M/s. Radha Enterprise as per partnership deed dated 3.12.2002. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ved. It was imperative to get the requisite and approval including signatures on the all documents for transfer of premises, lease deed, transfer of shares and papers for transfer of membership rights in Juhu gymkhana, which are valuable rights, a portion of amount was required to be paid to both the lady members since it is jointly held. g) The purchaser of the flats also insisting that since both the parties are party to agreement, due consideration is required to be paid to enter a legal and enforceable document. h) The membership rights of the Nutan Laxmi Co-operative Society are a valuable right and it enjoys all the facilities like membership of Juhu Vile Parle Gymkhana Cub etc and leasehold rights in plot. As per t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Co-operative Housing Society Limited. Considering the above facts the consideration received by Krishna P. Ved and Krupa R Ved are correctly apportioned and paid. l) The ld AR before us stated that the said income is declared by Smt Krishna Ved and Smt Krupa Ved in their respective returns of income for the A.Y.2015-16 which were accepted by the department as such. 6. We find that the ld AO observed that the sale consideration was distributed among 4 persons , whereas the cost of purchase was borne by two persons only i.e Pratap Ved and Rajesh Ved and that no payments were made by Smt Krishna Ved and Smt Krupa Ved. Accordingly, the ld AO held that the sale consideration is to be divided only between two persons as under:- DET....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the extent of Rs. 44,63,434/- which is the subject matter of dispute before us. 7. We find that the ld CIT(A) has confirmed the addition on a different ground by stating that the addition should have been made under Section 64(1) of the Act by applying clubbing provisions. 8. We find that Shri Pratap H Ved, Shri Rajesh Ved (assessee herein before us), Smt Krishna Ved and Smt Krupa Ved, had joined the partnership firm M/s Radhe Enterprise. We find from the facts narrated hereinabove that assessee and Shri Pratap H Ved had paid for the cost of acquisition of the plot originally and hence when plot was brought in as capital contribution to the partnership firm, their respective capital accounts were duly credited for such amount. We fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Admittedly, as per law, the same could be applied only for spouse and for son's wife. Hence the addition sustained by the ld CIT(A) deserves to be deleted on this count itself. 9. In any case, we find from the income tax returns of Smt. Krishna Ved and Smt Krupa Ved for the Asst Year 2015-16, which are forming part of the paper books filed before us, they had duly disclosed the capital gains attributable to their share without claiming any deduction towards cost of acquisition. We find from the computation of income for the Asst Year 2015-16 of both the ladies, that they were conscious of their income tax obligations and had duly disclosed the share of their sale consideration as long term capital gains (without any cost) and had duly c....