TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1753
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs. 43,60,704/- as short term capital gain on sell of plot by the assessee whereas assessee has declared long term capital gain at Rs. 1,42,111/- and has further erred in rejecting the claim of Rs. 9,25,000/- being expenses incurred by assessee on improvement of the said land and further erred in invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act and that too without giving show cause notice and impugned addition has been made without considering the submissions of assessee and by recording incorrect facts and findings and without giving adequate opportunity of hearing. 2. That in any case and any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....incurred by the assessee after the date of sale of the plot. Consequent to that the assessment u/s 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act was passed on 22.03.2013 by the ld AO. He made the addition of Rs. 11 lacs u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Further, the capital gain of the property was worked out as short term capital gain considering the sale value of Rs. 63 lacs and granting from there the cost of purchase of plot of Rs. 19.39 lacs. Consequently, the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 5460704/- instead of Rs. 116860/-. 4. The assessee carried the matter before the ld CIT(A) where he deleted the addition u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act and confirmed the addition on account of short term capital gain of Rs. 43.60 lacs. Therefore, the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....med as cost of improvement. He therefore, submitted that the revenue authorities failed to consider the above claim. With respect to difference in circle rate and rate at which the above property was sold, he stated that "agreement to sale‟ with the buyer was entered into on 20.12.2005 for total consideration of Rs. 31.50 lacs. He stated that revision in the circle rate from Rs. 7000/- to Rs. 14000/- was after six months of the date of "agreement to sale". He further stated that actual transfer deed was signed on 02.08.2006, he therefore, stated that when the agreement to sale was made it was at the circle rate and the ld AO is not justified in taking the circle rate as on the date of the transfer deed. He further referred to the deci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee was to execute lease deed within 30 days from the date of issue of check list. According to clause 6, the assessee was allowed to pay the balance installment of plot on premium along with the interest on the due date. The assessee was also to enjoy the lease hold rights for a period of 90 years from the date of execution of the lease hold deed. The assessee says that date of acquisition of the property is required to be considered from 17.09.2002. The claim of the AO is that on 12.05.2006, the Noida Authority executed the lease deed in favour of the assessee company. Therefore, this is the date on which the assessee acquired the property and hence it should be taken as date of acquisition. Vide agreement dated 20.12.2005, the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ider meaning. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble madras High Court in 301 ITR 345. In the present case by obtaining the orders of the Noida Authority of transfer memorandum on 17.09.2002, the assessee got a right to get the lease hold right for 90 years from that date. It conferred the right upon the assessee to hold that particular property from that date. Such is also the view taken by the Hon‟ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Madhu Kaul Vs. CIT 368 ITR 148. Therefore, the view taken by the ld AO that the assessee held property only from 05.06.2006 is devoid of any merit. In fact assessee got the right over the property on 17.09.2002. Therefore, the property was held by the assessee for more than 36 months and....