TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 621
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eturn of income for the AY 2019- 20 on 20.7.2019 admitting total income of Rs.2,95,600. The case was selected for scrutiny. The assessee being an eligible assessee as per the provisions of section 144C of the Act, the AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C by issuing a draft assessment order in which an addition of Rs.52,89,346 was made towards capital gains. Aggrieved, the assessee filed its objections before the DRP, who confirmed the said addition. The AO in the final assessment order considered the correct indexation value of the year of acquisition and revised the addition to Rs.64,60,469. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the final order of assessment in accordance with the directions of the DRP. 3. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ingly the amended provisions of section 144C would become applicable. In view of this, the additional ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. 7. We will now consider the issue on merits. During the year under consideration, the assessee sold a property for a consideration of Rs.1,55,00,000. In the statement of income the assessee computed the capital gain as under:- Sale Consideration Rs. 1,55,00,000/- Less: brokerage/Selling expenses Rs. 1,55,000/- Net Sale Consideration Rs. 1,53,45,000/- Less: Indexed Cost of acquisition (Rs.70,00,000 * 280/129) Rs. 1,51,93,798/- Long Term Capital Gains Rs. 1,51,202/- 8. The breakup of the cost of acquisition as submitted by the assessee before the AO is extracted below....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 1.2.2008, the AO noticed that as per the Sale Deed, the fair value of the property was adopted at Rs.36,05,000 on which the assessee paid the stamp duty, whereas the assessee has adopted a value of Rs.49,44,000 as the purchase cost for the purpose of computing capital gains. The AO issued a show cause notice in this regard to the assessee. The assessee in response submitted that the property was originally booked by one Mr. Manish Dokania and Manoj Dokania (assignment holders) with the builder, Larsen & Toubro [L&T] and since the assessee was interested in the said property, he paid a sum of Rs.49,44,000 to the agreement holder. The assessee also submitted that he has entered into an assignment agreement dated 1.10.2007 with the assign....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed income as Rs.73,47,020/- as against the actual adjusted total income which was only Rs.2,95,600/-. This panel has verified the copy of income tax returns filed by the assessee and computation statement, it is found that the actual adjusted total income was only Rs.2,95,600/-. Hence this panel directs the Assessing Officer to adopt the correct returned income as per Income Tax return filed by the assessee. b) The plea of the assessee that the Assessing Officer has not provided details for cost of acquisition arrived in the draft order at Rs.49,08,340/-. This panel has verified this plea of the assessee and found that the AO has given complete details in para 5 & 6 of the draft assessment order. This panel finds no infirmity in the actio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e action of AO." 13. The AO issued the final order of assessment after correcting the index value of the year of acquisition that resulted in final addition of Rs.64,60,469. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 14. The ld. AR submitted that the actual amount of consideration paid by the assessee to the agreement holders is a sum of Rs.49,44,000 and the reason quoted by the AO for not considering the agreement of assignment is that the agreement is not registered. The ld. AR also submitted that the payment by the assessee to the agreement holders is done through proper banking channels and in this regard, drew our attention to the agreement of assignment at page 74 of PB. The ld. AR also drew our attention to the fact ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f stamp duty and there is no acquisition of any title by the assessee through unregistered deed. It is submitted by the ld. DR that the amount paid through Assignment Agreement cannot be considered as cost of acquisition. The ld. DR therefore supported the cost of acquisition considered by the lower authorities. 16. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. From the perusal of the breakup of the cost acquisition extracted in the earlier part of this order and the assignment agreement it is noticed that the assessee has considered a sum of Rs.49,44,000 paid to the assignment holders as per the assignment agreement dated 01.10.2007 as cost of acquisition. It is also noticed that the assessee has paid Rs.5,98,160....