Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (8) TMI 943

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....authorities' action disallowing his payment of Rs.32 lakhs made to his mother; for the purpose of computing long term capital gains, in the relevant previous year. The CIT(A)'s detailed discussion affirming the Assessing Officer's action to this effect reads as follows :- "4.4 I have perused the material on record and the contention of the Appellant carefully. I find the Appellant has contended that, the settlement with the mother (and the father) was essential to make the Agreement. The Appellant has also contended that, the amount paid to the mother was not income in the hands of the Appellant by following the 'Real income' theory. The Appellant has also raised the issue of double taxation as the mother of the Appellant had show....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an overriding title and diversion by it is nonexistent in this case. In fact, in my view an botched up attempt has been made to distribute the Sale proceeds from one hand to another to lessen the liability of Capital Gains in the hands of the sons. The dates of the Agreement 18.02.2012 with the builder and 18.05.2012 with the parents (cheque given to parents 02.08.2012) also proves that, the contention of the Appellant of the parents not signing without the money paid to them, is devoid of merit. The contention of the Appellant that, the parents refused to sign the Agreement without the payment of Rs.32,00,000/- for 'Bread butter in old age', from the Appellant, which he gave to the mother and the brother gave to the father, lacks s....