TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1901
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the claim of the assessee that the Long Term Capital Gain would be assessable only in the year in which the entire consideration was received from the Developer as per Development Agreement. The assessment under appeal be cancelled as the capital gain is not assessable in the year under appeal as per law. 2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee family that the family was partitioned on 21-08-2000 and each of the members were independent owners of the property. Such capital gain was assessable in their own hands. 3) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the claim of partition in the fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he hands of the assessee but it should have been assessed in the hands of the members independently as claimed due to partition/family arrangement. 7) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C is not justified. 3. The ground of appeal No.1 raised by assessee is against the assessment of income from long term capital gains in the hands of assessee in the year when the assessee had entered into Development Agreement. 4. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the case of assessee was reopened by recording reasons for reopening the same and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued various notices under section 142(1) of the Act, but the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er husband was working in the Government Department as Veterinary doctor. Her husband had purchased the said residential house in her name on 21.07.1989 for Rs. 75,000/-. All the family members were residing in the said property but since the sons and daughters had got married, they were living separately from father and mother. The partition was made in the year 2000 and as on 01.10.2011, the assessee and her sons and daughters had entered into Agreement for Development of the said house with the builder and hence, the names of other members were as consenting parties in the Development Agreement. The plea of assessee was not accepted and the Assessing Officer held that the said property was exclusively held by the assessee. Therefore, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0. On perusal of record and after hearing both the learned Authorized Representatives, the issue which arises in the present appeal is whether the income from capital gains is to be assessed in the hands of assessee in the year under appeal. The assessee had acquired the property in the year 1989 which was registered in the name of assessee. The Assessing Officer holds that the said property was acquired out of funds of husband as the assessee had no income. On the other hand, the plea of assessee was that the said property was acquired out of joint funds and jointly belongs to all the members of family i.e. assessee, her husband and her sons and daughters. The assessee in the year under consideration had entered into Development Agreement ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per shall jointly own the portion of the developed property, under which developer was constructing ground + four storied building over the said plot of land. The said Development Agreement was executed on 01.10.2011. The assessee is in appeal for assessment year 2012-13 i.e. the financial year in which the Development Agreement was entered into between the parties. At the time of entering into Development Agreement, the assessee received only sum of Rs. 5,50,000/- which was though called as entire consideration amount, was actually part of consideration amount since the assessee was also entitled to receive six constructed flats on different floors in the proposed building. The main part of consideration i.e. value of constructed portion t....