TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 805
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Ld. DR has not raised any objection to condone the delay, therefore we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual filed his return of income on 31.01.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 2,30,840/- for the year under consideration. A notice u/s 148 was issued on 27.03.2017 as it was found that the assessee along with others had entered into an agreement with M/s Shriram Builders & Developers for transfer of his rights in respect of Plot No.20 & 20A, Sector-22, at Ulwe Node, Tal: Panvel Dist. Raigad vide tripartite agreement dated 12.09.2011. Under the provisions of section 45(1) of the IT Act,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....year has already been sent back to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC & further requested to remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh. 6. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue submitted before us that despite due service of notices of hearing the assessee remained absent before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Accordingly, Ld. DR requested before the Bench to confirm the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 7. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides & perused the material available on reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her co-owners is equivalent to Plot Nos.20 & 20A as referred to herein above. These plots were allotted to the assessee on 26-08-2011 and the assessee paid Rs. 8,58,250/- to CIDCO, with net outflow of certain figure, say Rs. Y (Rs. 8,58,250/- minus Rs. X). The assessee transferred these two plots on 12-09-2011 for a sum of Rs. 10.75 crore, both the events happening during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. On an overview, it can be seen that there are basically two transfer transactions of the assessee, first, the transfer by compulsory acquisition of land by the Government of Maharashtra and the, second, of the transfer of plots to M/s. Shriram Builders & Developers, which were allotted to the assessee i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shriram Builders & Developers. The AO adopted a sum of Rs. 8,58,250/- paid by the assessee to CIDCO as cost of acquisition of the two plots in the computation of capital gain in the second transaction, which is neither here nor there. This amount is nothing but refund of the original compensation awarded to the assessee prior to 12.5% scheme along with certain addition. Once the two plots got allotted in lieu of compulsory acquisition of the assessee's agricultural land, their fair market value on the date of allotment minus Rs. Y, substituted the earlier amounts received as full value of consideration. Neither the original receipt of compensation in seclusion can be construed as the fair market value of the property in the first transacti....