News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
I-T - If transfer of capital assets is not finalised, part payment made in a particular AY cannot be subjected to capital gains: ITAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAR 20, 2019: THE ISSUE IS - Whether without finalization of transfer of capital assets, the capital gains cannot be taxed in the AY in which only part of the sale considerations is made. YES IS THE ANSWER.

Facts of the case

The individual assessee purchased a two storey residential property in 1999. Consequent to the amendment of D.C regulations, the additional construction became permissible on the land on purchase of TDR. In 2002, the assessee entered into a development agreement and also a supplementary agreement subsequently with one M/s U.S. Magnet Pvt Ltd. As per the agreements, the assessee was entitled to receive certain sum in cash and two flats that were going to be constructed. During the assessment proceedings of relevant AY 2008-09, the AO noticed that the assessee has received allotment letters of flats and took the view that such flats were in exchange of property owned by the assessee. Details of such transaction resulting in capital gain in the relevant to AY was not furnished. Therefore, the AO assessed the value of both flats amounting as LTCG and passed the assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147. The CIT(A) affirmed the order passed by the AO.

On hearing the appeal, the Tribunal held that,

++ the liability to capital gains tax shall arise upon entering development agreement, if the assessee has handed over the possession of property and received part consideration. This was held by the jurisdictional High Court in Chaturbhuj Dwarkadas Kapadia vs. CIT. The copy of occupancy certificate shows that the assessee had handed over the possession as per the development agreement and the construction itself has been completed in the year 2006. All these events have taken place much prior to the FY relevant to AY 2008-09. The assessee has also placed copies of electricity bills to show that he has taken possession of flats in the year 2005 itself. These facts would show that the capital gains liability cannot, in any case, would arise in AY 2008-09. Thus, the capital gains, if any, arising on account of development agreement is not assessable in AY 2008-09. The flats received by the assessee are only a part of total sale consideration receivable by the assessee as per the development agreement. There cannot be any dispute that the capital gains liability shall arise upon completion of transfer of capital asset. Hence, the assessee cannot postpone the capital gains tax liability on account of delay in receipt of sale consideration and on the very same criteria, the AO cannot bring capital gains to taxation in the year of receipt of part of sale consideration. Accordingly the Revenue was not justified in placing reliance on the allotment letter given by the developer to the assessee. Accordingly, CIT(A) order is set aside.

(See 2019-TIOL-653-ITAT-MUM)

 


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.