News Update

Cus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiCus - The penalty imposed on assessee was set aside by Tribunal against which revenue is in appeal is far below the threshold limit fixed under Notification issued by CBDT, thus on the ground of monetary policy, revenue cannot proceed with this appeal: HCGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - If assessee is not charging VAT paid on purchase of goods & services to its P&L account i.e., not claiming it as expenditure, there is no requirement to treat refund of such VAT as income: ITATBengal Governor restricts entry of State FM and local police into Raj BhawanI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATCops flatten camps of protesting students at Columbia UnivI-T - No additions are permitted on account of bogus purchases, if evidence submitted on purchase going into export and further details provided of sellers remaining uncontroverted: ITATTurkey stops all trades with Israel over GazaI-T- Provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) cannot be invoked, where a necessary condition of the money received without consideration by assessee, has not been fulfilled: ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political eventsI-T- As per settled position in law, cooperative housing society can claim deduction u/s 80P, if interest is earned on deposit of own funds in nationalised banks: ITATApple reports lower revenue despite good start of the yearI-T- Since difference in valuation is minor, considering specific exclusion provision benefit is granted to assessee : ITATHome-grown tech of thermal camera transferred to IndustryI-T - Presumption u/s 292C would apply only to person proceeded u/s 153A and not for assessee u/s 153C: ITATECI asks parties to cease registering voters for beneficiary-oriented schemes under guise of surveys
 
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 N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.