2024 (11) TMI 637

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enue has challenged the ld. CIT(A)'s order deleting the addition of Rs. 19,64,304/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer ('A.O.' for short) u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Act as 'income from other sources' on account of difference in the stamp duty value received on sale of immovable property and on the deletion of addition of Rs. 3,12,00,000/-, aggregating to Rs. 3,31,64,304/- u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Act along with the other related grounds. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturer and exporter of readymade garments since 2014 and the sole proprietor of M/s. True Fashion. The assessee is also said to be a partner in the partnership firm of M/s. S. K. International Exports Co. which was also into the bu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee contended that ground no. 1 raised by the Revenue on addition of Rs. 19,64,304/- pertains to a residential premises situated at Noida for which the assessee had acquired a lease hold rights from the vendor and the same is not a transfer of ownership. The ld. AR further stated that the said transactions is evidenced from the 'agreement to sell' dated 09.01.2012 from the allottee for a consideration of Rs. 43,85,904/- in which case the developer of the said property had executed a sub lease deed dated 22.01.2018 transferring the title along with the possession to the assessee. The ld. AR further relied on the allotment letter issued by the developer to the assessee dated 24.02.2012 for the purpose of sub leasing the said property to the as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....section 2(14) of the Act and relied on the following decisions : 230 ITR 864 (Bom) Bafna Charitable Trust vs. CIT 122 ITR 594 (Bom) CIT vs. Tata Services Ltd. 90 ITD 44 (Mum-Trib) ACIT vs. Smt. Hansaben B. Mehta 287 ITR 142 (Pune-ITAT) Smt. Nargis K. Irani vs. ITO 10. The ld. A.O. invoked section 56(2)(vii)(b) in his first draft assessment order dated 15.02.2021 and, subsequently invoked section 56(2)(x)(b)(B) of the Act in the second draft assessment order dated 05.03.2021, as the former section was not in operation w.e.f. 01.04.2017, for the reason that the assessee had registered the said property only on 22.01.2018. The ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, held that as the date of 'agreement to sell' is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er sources' u/s. 56(x) of the Act on account of difference in the stamp duty value. It is observed that the assessee had acquired an undertaking (export oriented unit (EOU)) with all its assets and liabilities which includes Industrial Gala nos. 85 to 86 from M/s. SK International Export Co. as a going concern for a slum sale consideration of Rs. 30 lacs vide agreement for slum sale dated 29.04.2016 w.e.f. 01.04.2016. The assessee's contention is that the same was accounted in the books of accounts of the assessee in F.Y. 2016-17 when the said consideration was paid, though the same was registered in F.Y. 2017-18. The assessee had placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R. C. Cooper vs. Union of India [1....