TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 226
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f ownership or possession in FY 2013-14, it cannot be concluded that the holding period started from 05.09.2013. (ii) In view of above, it is concluded that the said property was registered by the assessee only on 25.11.2016 as per the sale deed between DLF Utilities Ltd & the assessee at Rs 2,71,87,5001-. The holding period should be computed from this date, making it a Short- Term Capital Asset as on the date of sale on 27.08.2018. The Ld. CIT(A)'s reliance on alleged earlier payment date is not supported by verifiable evidence and contrary to facts on record. (iii) In agreement between Ms. Nishi Mallick and the assessee, submitted as additional evidence, it is mentioned that total consideration price of Rs 4,10,00,000/- includes basic sales price, parking spaces, preferred location charge, IBMS charge, electricity charge, govt taxes, service tax, stamp duty, possession charges, club membership charges and others. The Ld. CIT(A) accepted the cost of acquisition at Rs. 4,10,00,000/- without verifying its breakup. Further, the CIT(A) has allowed the indexation on Rs. 20,68,000/- as part of cost of acquisition towards registration charges based on the assessee&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r AY 2019-20. Accordingly, loss claimed by the appellant in her return of income of Rs. 83,20,409/- was disallowed by the AO and addition of Rs. 2,03,12,500/- made to the returned income on account of ShortTerm Capital Gain. 3.1 Further the AO observed that as per Schedule AL of the ITR, the appellant had declared 1/3rd share in a property of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- in assets whereas no corresponding income from House property was disclosed in the ITR. Appellant was asked to submit that as to why deemed rent should not be considered as income in respect of said inherited property. No reply was furnished by the appellant. On the basis of average market rent of the area involved, the AO estimated the monthly rent for the area HM Patil Marg, Shivaji Park Mumbai @ Rs. 60,000/- p.m. As the appellant holds 1/3 rd share in the property, accordingly, the deemed annual lettable value in the hands of the appellant was determined at Rs. 2,40,000 @ Rs. 20,000/- per month and after allowing 30% standard deduction u/s 24, net addition of Rs. 1,68,000/- was made by AO to the returned income under the head Income from House Property as deemed rental income." 4. Aggrieved by the assessment or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the transfer of property right is deemed complete when the owner's rights are extinguished and the transferee is enabled to enjoy the property as owner. In the Agreement to Sell, it is made clear that after receiving the sale consideration amount of Rs. 4,10,00,000/- the vendee 1.e. the appellant Ms. Bina Baltliwala, shall have full right to nominate or assign this agreement to sell in favour of any person or persons, be it a firm, body corporate or association of person and the vendor shall have no objection to it. The fact that the entire agreed purchase price of Rs. 4,10,00,000 was paid by the appellant during FY 2013-14 itself also stands verified from the copies of the cheques/Demand Drafts as well as the certificate issued by the Bank as extracted at para 12.6 above. Hence, the date of acquisition of the property in the hands of the appellant will be the date of performance of the Agreement to Sell i.e.05.09.2013 and not the date of registration of the property i.e. 25.11.2016 as the Agreement to Sell had the effect of transferring or enabling the enjoyment of the property in favour of the appellant. Further, the cost of acquisition in the hands of the appellant is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecompute amount of Long term Capital gain/loss after allowing benefit of indexed cost of acquisition for the above said amount of Rs. 4,10,00,000 taking Cost Inflation Index for the FY 2013-14 as the base. 13. The appellant has further claimed following amounts as part of cost of acquisition of the property in addition to the amount of Rs. 4,10,00,000: - Registration Charges paid to DLF Limited Rs. 20,68,000 - Amount paid to Belaire Condominium Association Rs. 3,50,500/-. 13.1 In this regard, the appellant has explained that though the registered Conveyance Deed executed by DLF in favour of the appellant, on which Stamp duty of Rs. 20,50,000 and registration fees of Rs. 15,000 was paid, is dated 25.11.2016, however, the appellant had already paid Registration charges of Rs. 20,68,000 to DLF Limited by way of demand draft dated 04.09.2013 itself i.e. at the time of purchase of property from Ms Nishi Mallick vide agreement to Sell dated 19.07.2013. Copy of the DD No.000023 dated 04.09.2013 and receipt dated 12.08.2013 issued by DLF Limited in this regard has also been furnished by the appellant. Further, this payment on 04.09.2013 also finds mentio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion with transfer as per the provision of section 48 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant has submitted copy of invoice dated 28.08.2018 issued by the broker charging brokerage of Rs. 4,75,000 (which comes out to be @ 1% of the sale price of Rs. 4,75,00,000) + GST @ 18%. However, the appellant has failed to furnish her bank statement, receipt for the brokerage payment, or any other evidence of actual payment of the same. Due to want of adequate documentary evidence to substantiate the payment, the claim of the appellant of Rs. 5,60,500 as having been incurred as expenditure in connection with the transfer of property is hereby rejected. The AO is directed to recompute the amount of LTCG accordingly. 15. With the findings given at para 12.10, 13.1, 13.2 & 14 above, grounds no. 3 to 7 stand partly allowed" 8. As could be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), during the first appellate proceedings, Assessee produced additional evidence and the Ld. CIT(A) called for the Remand Report and the Ld. A.O. has not made any adverse comment. After obtaining the Remand Report and on adjudicating the issue the Ld. CIT(A) held that the Assessee acquired the property in questio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ishi Mallick vide agreement to Sell dated 19.07.2013. Copy of the DD No.000023 dated 04.09.2013 and receipt dated 12.08.2013 issued by DLF Limited in this regard has also been furnished by the appellant. Further, this payment on 04.09.2013 also finds mention in the Full & Final Receipt dated 04.09.2013 issued by Ms. Nishi Mallick, notarised on 05.09.2013, as reproduced at para 12.3 above, as well as in the bank certificate issued by Standard Chartered Bank extracted at para 12.6 above. The AO has also not made any adverse comment in this regard in the Remand Report. Accordingly, on appreciation of the evidences furnished, the claim of the appellant is found acceptable and the registration charges of Rs. 20,68,000 form part of the cost of acquisition and eligible for indexation w.e.f. year of payment i.e. FY 2013-14. Accordingly, the AO is directed to allow benefit of deduction of the aforesaid amount of registration charges of Rs. 20,68,000 with indexation with Cost Inflation Index of FY 2013-14 as the base. 13.2. Further, regarding the amount of Rs. 3,50,500 stated to be paid the appellant to the Belaire Condominium Association on 04.09.2013, the appellant has stated that....