TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1920
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "1. General On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] has erred in dismissing the appeal and thereby confirming the order passed under 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act). 2. Natural justice violated On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) failed to grant sufficient opportunity to present the case and thus principles of natural justice are grossly violated. 3. Long-term capital gains wrongly treated as short-term capital gains a) The Ld. CIT(A), by confirming the Assessment order, has erred in treating the longterm capital gain arising out of the transfer of a residential unit as a shor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee has sold immovable property being Flat at Vireshwar Heights, Ville Parle (E), Mumbai for consideration of Rs. 1,02,50,000/- and claimed the gains arising from sale of flat as long term capital gain and thereafter purchased another property on which it claimed exemption u/s 54 of the Act. 4. The AO denied the claim of long term capital gain as the date of agreement executed with builder for purchase of flat, which has been sold by the assessee is 15/09/2011 and the date of sale of the impugned flat is 03/09/2013. Therefore, the asset was not a long term capital asset and re-computed the capital gains as short term capital gains denying the claim of exemption u/s 54 of the Act. 5. The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was seized with the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in treating the gain arising from the sale of capital asset as Long Term Capital Gain without appreciating the fact that mere letter of allotment does not lead to creation of proper and effective right over the capital asset sought to be acquired, but only on execution of an agreement spelling out all the exact terms and conditions for acquisition?" 8.1. And the Hon'ble Court answered as under:- "4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we notice that the CBDT in its circular No.471 dated 15th October, 1986 had clarified this position by holding that when an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ections 54 and 54F of the Income tax Act." It can thus be seen that the entire issue was clarified by the CBDT in its above mentioned two circulars dated 15th October, 1986 and 16th December, 1993. In terms of such clarifications, the date of allotment would be the date on which the purchaser of a residential unit can be stated to have acquired the property. There is nothing on record to suggest that the allotment in construction scheme promised by the builder in the present case was materially different from the terms of allotment and construction by D.D.A.. In that view of the matter, CIT appeals of the Tribunal correctly held that the assessee had acquired the property in question on 31st December, 2004 on which the allotment le....