TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 842
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....darbha Veneere Industries Limited by order dated 30.08.2023- (i) Whether failure on the part of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider the appellant's contentions based on non-applicability of Section 50-C of the Act of 1961 as raised in paragraph 1 and especially paragraph 1.6 of the written submissions in support of the appeal which was thereafter also sought to be urged in the Miscellaneous Application filed by the appellant vitiates the consideration of the appeal by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to that extent? (ii) Whether in the light of the decision in Atul G. Puranik Vs. Income Tax Officer [TS-197-ITAT-2011(Mum)-O] of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the provisions of Section 50-C of the Act of 1961 could have been applied in the matter of transfer of leasehold rights?" 3. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee filed its return of income on 30/03/2007, declaring total income of Rs. 24,02,102/- The return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently, the return was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) was issued to the assessee 4. The Ld.AO noted that the assessee claimed bad debts of Rs. 18,99,714/-. As the assessee could not s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,100/-(may be verified by AO also) * The profit on sale of aforesaid land shall be taken as long term capital gain. * While working out the long term capital gain, cost index will also have to be worked out. * The AO shall therefore charge the gain as long term capital gain on sale of land as per law and aforesaid directions. * The value adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority is Rs. 1,43,53,100/-. The same shall be adopted for the purposes of Sec.50C. The AO may verify the facts in this regard. Besides, the said lease hold land is for 95 years. The assessee is owner thereof." Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4.2 The Ld.AR submitted that, the capital gain was earned on sale of leasehold right that cannot be treated as capital assets. It is submitted that, the assessee is was holding leasehold rights in the land and factory building at Taloja as per the agreement to lease dated 05/01/1991 with Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as MIDC). He submitted that as per the agreement with MIDC, the leasehold rights was allotted to the assessee on the industrial ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the Ld.AR in fairness brought to our notice decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) in case of Vidharbha Veneer Industries v. ITO in ITA no. 31 of 2020 vide letter date 01/04/2025. He submitted that in the present decision by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, decided an identical issue by observing as under para 7 page 8 of paper book. "7. We, therefore, find that merely because the land was originally allotted by the MIDC by way of a lease to the predecessor of the appellant, who in turn has received the same by way of an assignment, that being one of the modes of transfer, of land or building, the mere use of a particular mode of transfer, cannot create any exception vis-avis the holding of the land or building by the Assessee. The word 'transfer' as used in Section 50C(1) of the IT Act, also cannot be used in a restricted sense and will have to be given widest amplitude, considering the nature and purpose of the section and thus would include all modes and methods of transfer as are permissible and recognizable in law. 8. Atul Puranik (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant does not consider the effect and import of Section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pt to consider the prescription of sub-section (1) of section 50C of the Act, which is as under : "50C. (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government (hereinafter in this section referred to as the "stamp valuation authority") for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed or assessable shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer." Thus two things are noticeable from this 'provision: * THAT it is a deeming provision and * THAT it extends only to land or building or both. 6.2. It is also apparent that the deeming provision has been incorporated to substitute the value adopted or assessed or assessable by stamp valuation authority in place of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer of land or building or both and in case the latter is lower than the former. From the language used in sub-secti....