TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 298
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hy S, AM Revenue by : Smt.S.Praveena, CIT-DR Assessee by : Sri.V.Chandrashekar, Advocate ORDER Per George George K, JM : These are group of five appeals. Four appeals at the instance of three asessees, namely, M/s.Shyamaraju & Co. (India) Private Limited and two of its directors. (The company had filed two appeals, i.e., for assessment years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. The two directors have filed appeal for A.Y.2008-2009) The Department has also filed appeal for assessment year 2008-2009. 2. Common issues are raised in these appeals. Hence, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. We shall first adjudicate the assessee's appeal. The details of same are as under:- Sl. No. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee-company. It was submitted that the land situated at Sy.No.106/2, 107/2 and 107/3 at Amani Bellandur Kane Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore, so acquired in the year 2004 were sold during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2008-2009, by its directors, viz., Sri.P.Shyama Raju on 18.02.2008 to M/s.Chrysalis Trading Private Limited as per the instructions and directions of the company. 6. Similarly, it is stated that the land so acquired in the year 2004, situated at Sy.No.89 and 90/1 at Amani Bellndur Kane Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore, were sold by its other Director viz., Sri.Umesh S.Raju on 25.07.2007 to M/s.Vikram Reddy and Madhusudan Reddy as per the instructions and directions of the company. 7. For the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the land sold was a capital asset u/s 2(14) of the Act. 9. Aggrieved by the orders for assessment years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, the company is in appeal before the Tribunal by contending that the capital gains ought to be assessed substantively in its hands and also raised grounds that it is exempt from capital gains since it is a sale of agricultural land. The concerned directors are also in appeal for assessment year 2008-2009 before the ITAT contending that the capital gains has to be taxed in the hands of the company. Further, the directors have also claimed exemption u/s 54F of the I.T.Act if capital gains is taxable in their individual hands. The learned AR reiterated the submissions made before the Income Tax Authorities. 10.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fact can be determined only by examining who is actually funded the purchase of land and who is in receipt of the sale consideration when the land was sold during the assessment year 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. It is claimed that - (i) the impugned properties were purchased in the year 2004 in the name of the directors and company had paid to the sellers directly through banking channel; (ii) the cost incurred for conversion of land from agricultural land to non-agricultural land were expended by the company; and (iii) though the sale consideration was credited in the capital accounts of the directors, the same was paid over to the company without any delay. 13. However, to verify the above claim, there is no mate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned AR did not press during the course of hearing. 15. In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.1650/Bang/2012 (Revenue's appeal) (A.Y.2008-09) 16. The solitary ground raised reads as follows:- "1. The learned CIT(A) in facts and in law erred in setting aside the issue of claim of deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act by ignoring the provisions of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 251 of the Income Tax Act which empowers the CIT(A) to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment only (after amendment made through the Finance Act, 2001)." 17. The assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iii) of the I.T.Act was denied by the Assessing Offic....