SHRI ANIL MURARILAL AGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 18(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY () Assessment Year: 2016-17
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated
28/08/2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax
(Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short Ld. CIT]
[in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2016-17, raising following grounds:
“On the facts a Learned CIT(A) Assessing Offic alleged Short T 1404 and 1405 facts and circum 2. On the facts a Learned CIT(A) Assessing Offic under consid purchase/sales A.Y. 2010-11 a In A.Y.2010-11 tantamount dou 3. On the facts a Learned CIT(A) Assessing Offic his wife jointly 4. On the facts a Learned CIT(A) Assessing Offic mentioned in t considering the 5. On the facts a Learned CIT(A) Assessing Offi Rs.93,89,191/ duty instead of considering the 6. On the facts a Learned CIT(A) Assessing Offic alleged plea th SRA scheme w purchased flat 7. The appellant c ground of appe 2. Briefly stated f engaged in the busin in the name of International’. The a under consideration ITA and circumstances of the case as well as ) has erred in confirming the actions of cer in making an addition of Rs. 1,42, Term Capital Gain earned on account of s 5 situated in Rashmi Heights, without con mstances of the case. nd circumstances of the case as well as ) has erred in confirming the actions of cer in not appreciating the fact that dur deration appellant has only regi s agreement and actual transaction happ and corresponding income already offered 1, therefore making an addition for the s uble taxation which is not allowable unde nd circumstances of the case as well as ) has erred in confirming the actions of cer in not appreciating the fact that the ap held the property in the equal proportion nd circumstances of the case as well as ) has erred in confirming the actions of cer in not considering the purchase valu the agreement as cost of acquisition of e facts and circumstances of the case. nd circumstances of the case as well as ) has erred in confirming the actions of icer in considering the Sale consideratio being the value adopted for the purpo f actual sale consideration of Rs.43,11,0 e facts and circumstances of the case. nd circumstances of the case as well as ) has erred in confirming the actions of cer in treating the transfer of rights is hat the assesse has violated terms and without appreciating the fact that the appe in SRA scheme. craves leave to add, amend, alter or de eal.” facts of the case are that the ness of distribution of eco-friend propriety concern namely assessee filed return of incom on 15/10/2016 declaring tota Anil Murarilal Agarwal 2 A No. 4715/MUM/2024 s in law, the the Learned ,86,671/- as sale of flat no nsidering the s in law, the the Learned ring the year istered the pened in the d for taxation same income, er the Act. s in law, the the Learned appellant and of share. s in law, the the Learned ue of flat as flat, without s in law, the the Learned on of flat at ose of stamp 00/- without s in law, the the Learned void on the condition of ellant has not lete the said e assessee was dly food packing ‘M/s Beriwal me for the year al income at Rs.
6,51,090/-. The retu for scrutiny assessm
Tax Act, 1961 [In sh
During the assessme that during the year the purchase and sa
Floor Rashmi Heights
Rashmi Heights, Ma that short term capi
1404 and 1405 was income.
3. In response to assessee said that th the assessee and hi those flats were bo financial year 2009- were sold/transfered
Shri. Aadesh Agarw capital gain arising f assessee and his wif for A.Y. 2010-11. It duly accepted by th which has been alre cannot be subjected
ITA rn of income filed by the assess ment and statutory notices un hort ‘The Act’] were issued and ent proceeding, the Assessing O r under consideration the asse le of two properties, namely flat s, Malad, Mumbai and flat No.
alad, Mumbai. The Ld. Assessin tal gain arising out of the sale s not declared by the assesse o show cause notice, it was su hose two flats were purchased i s wife Smt. Lata Agarwal. He ooked on 07.10.2005, but s
10 corresponding to assessmen tohis sons namely Shri. Abhish wal respectively. The correspon from sale of those two flats wa fe in their respective of returns was submitted that those retu he department and, therefore, eady offered and accepted by t to tax again in A.Y. under consi
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
3
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
see was selected der the Income d complied with.
Officer(AO) noted essee registered t No. 1404, 14th
1405, 14th Floor ng Officer noted of the flats No.
ee in return of ubmitted by the in joint name of submitted that ubsequently in nt year 2010-11
hek Agarwal and nding long term s offered by the s of income filed urns have been the transaction the department, ideration. Those contentions of the as The Assessing Officer the assessee in violat
Government of Maha that the assessee did
Abhishek Agarwal an noted that part pay respectively was pa purchase price of R amount had been pa
Agarwal to the build the assessee could cl made by him. The lon assessment year 20
was found not to be Officer, the assessee sale of properties assessee availed ben
Act and no long term
The relevant observat under:
“ii). Details of Sal
2015-16:-
S No Description of properties
ITA ssessee were not accepted by As r observed that those flats had tion of the slum rehabilitation s arashtra. Further the Assessing d not receive full payment agai nd Shri Aadesh Agarwal. The A yment of Rs. 3,00,000/- and aid by the assessee to build
Rs. 12,33,000/- of each flat a aid by Shri Abhishek Agarwal a der. The Assessing Officer was o laim capital gain on the part of ng term capital gain declared by 10-11 though noted by the as e properly calculated. Accordin should have offered long term at Rs.4,90,691/- for A.Y.201
efit of exemption/deduction u/
m capital gain was offered for th tions of the Assessing Officer ar le of immovable properties in the f
Name of the Purchaser
Date of Agreement
Sale Am
(Rs
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
4
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
ssessing Officer.
been booked by scheme (SRA) of Officer observed inst sale to Shri
Assessing Officer
Rs. 2,31,500/- der against the nd the balance and Shri Aadesh of the view that f the investment y the assessee in ssessing officer, ng to Assessing capital gain on 10-11, but the s 54/54F of the he tax purposes.
re reproduced as financial year mount s)
Market
Value (Rs)
Flat No.1404, 14th Floor, Rashmi Heights, Malad Mumbai
Flat No. 1405, 14th Floor, Rashmi Heights, Malad, Mumbai
During the as has sold two proper
2010-11 and conseq of these flats were o submitted letter dtd
Developers Ltd. for Aadesh Agarwaland has written letter d
Aadesh Agarwal for the copy of return o income of Shri Anil A As per compu sale of the property
Flat No.
Sale Date
Cost Date
1404
11/12/200
07/10/200
1405
11/12/200
ITA
Aadesh
Agarwal
16.01.2016
43,11,0
Abhishek
Agarwal
09.2015
43,11,0
ssessment proceedings, the assessee rties (Flat No. 1404 & 1405) in F.Y. 2
quently, long term capital gains on fro offered in A.Y. 2010-11. In support of d. 12.12.2009 written to M/s. Rashm transfer of flats to Shri. Abhishek Ag d in turn M/s. Rashmi Infra-structure dtd. 13.12.2009 to Shri Abhishek Ag r accepting the transfer. The assessee of Income for A.Y. 2010-11 alongwith
Agarwal and Smt. Lata Agarwal.
utation filed by the assessee, he has in A.Y. 2010-11 as under.
Sale Value
Cost Value
Indexed
Cost
LTC
09
05
21,55,500
6,16,500
7,83,960
13,71
09
21,55,500
7,83,960
13,71
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
5
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
000
93,89,191
000
93,89,189
claimed that he
2009-10 i.e. A.Y.
om transfer/sale his claim he has mi Infra-structure garwal and Shri e Developers Ltd.
garwal and Shri e also submitted h computation of offered LTCG on CG
Investment in new property
(Rs)
,540
15,95,750
,540
15,95,750
07/10/200
As per tabulation invested the sum u/
received from Long T mentioned two flats i his return of income.
agreement for the cla the assessee has giv of acquisition of the p of properties. The ass of acquisition for calc full amount of consid sell of these propert
Agarwal. The asses properties equal with not invested any sum has invested Rs. 1,
1405. The assessee made by him.
If, it is assumed th correct than the night
Flat
No.
Sale Date
Cost Date
Sa
1404
12/12/2009
28/03/2006
21
3,
1405
12/12/2009
27/06/2006
21
2,0
ITA
05
6,16,500
above, the assessee has claimed th
/s 54 of the 17.Act, 1961 of the L
Term Capital Gain (LTCG) from sale in new properties and hence. LTCG as . However, the assessee has not file aim of his investment u/s 54 of the IT.
ven wrong, calculation taking wrong in properties and hence, evaded tax on sessee has taken full value of conside culation of capital gain, even after he eration to the seller till the date of so c ties to Shri Abhishek Agarwal and ssee has also divided cost of acqu h co-owner, Smt. Lata Agarwal, even m for purchase of flat no. 1404 Smt.
50,000/- on 16.03.2006 for purcha can claim indexation on the part of t hat the assessee's all claims/data/d t calculation of LTCG are as under:
ale Value
Cost
Value
Indexed
Cost
LTCG offered by the assessee
Inve in pr
,55,500
,00,000
3,81,489
17,74,011
15,9
,55,500
03,100
2,47,320
19,08,180
15,9
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
6
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
hat he has re-
LT Act, 1961, e of the above s Nil offered in ed any details
Act. However, ndexation cost
LTCG on sale eration as cost e has not paid called claim of Shri. Aadesh uisition of the after, she has Lata Agarwal ase of flat no.
the investment documents are estment n new roperty
(Rs)
LTCG to be offer
95,750
1,78,261
95,750
3,12,430
4,90,691
Hence, it ca have offered LTCG
2010-11 but he has It is also impo registered/made a buyers(Shri Abhish financial year 2010
on sale of immova about how he has selling price of the f in F.Y. 2015-16. 4. The Ld.
contentions of t consideration registered sale d term capital gai the Act on 29/
noted that, fir violation of the furnish any agr by the assesse assessee failed of the posses consideration.
5. Before us the L book containin assessee referre under the year
ITA an be seen from above table that th
G on sale of the properties of Rs. 4
s not offered any LTCG for taxation.
ortant to mention here that, the ass any agreement with the Seller (bui hek Agarwal and Shri Aadesh Agar
0-11 as claimed by the assessee as a able properties. The assessee has not taken selling price of Rs. 43,11,000/- flats first came to record while registe
Assessing Officer accordingly the assessee and assessed the d and purchase consideration deeds amounting to Rs. 1,42,86
n in the assessment order passe
12/2018. On further appeal, the rstly the assessee had purc
SRA Scheme, Secondly, the as reement to the effect of transfer e in assessment year 2010-11
to furnish any document/evide ssion of the immovable p
Ld. counsel for the assessee ha g pages 1 to 152. The Ld. c ed to the purchase and sale under consideration in respect
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
7
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
e assessee should
4,90,691/. for A.Y.
sessee has neither lder) nor with the rwal)till the end of arriving capital gain t given any details
- for each flats. The ered the documents y rejected the difference of sale n recorded in 6,671/- as short ed u/s 143(3) of e Ld. CIT(A) also chased flats in ssessee failed to r of the property
1, Thirdly, the ence in support property under as filed a paper counsel for the deed registered of flat No. 1404
and 1405, which and 102 to 136
also referred to 1405, which are of the paper boo the income tax assessee for A.Y
27 to page No.
Lata Agarwal, a no. 55 to page the assessee fi entered into by Agarwal and Sh flats in financ documents, the the capital gain already been of A.Y. 2010-11. H have been p consideration, in and in effect th
Shri. Abhishek sons of the ass on the decision of K. Ramakris
ITA h are available on paper book p of the paper book respectively.
o the allotment letter of the fla e available on paper book pages ok respectively. The Ld. counsel x return and computation of Y. 2010-11, available on paper
54 and return of income filed b a copy of which is available on p no. 80 of the paper book. The iled copy of the memorandum y the assessee with his sons hri. Aadesh Agarwal for sale o cial year 2009-10. In view e Ld. counsel for the assessee n arising on the sale of those ffered by the assessee in retur
He submitted that only registra prepared in the assessmen n view of the conditions impose he flats had already transferred
Agarwal and Shri. Aadesh Ag sessee. The Ld. counsel for the of the Hon’ble High Court of D shnan reported in (2014) 48 t
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
8
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
g. No. 89 to 101
The Ld. counsel at No 1404 and No.1 to 3 and 4
l also referred to income of the r book page No.
by his wife Smt.
paper book page
Ld. counsel for m of agreement
Shri. Abhishek of the respective of the above submitted that e two flats has rn of income for ation documents t year under d by the builder in the name of garwal, who are assessee relied
Delhi in the case taxman.com 55
(Delhi)/[2014] 2
allotment has b and not the da counsel also rel the Tribunal in 2291/Mum/20
period of the pr date of issue of that in the in financial year 2
was liable for lo declared by the capital gain wa consideration.
6. On the contrar authorities.
7. We have heard r relevant materia whether the h computed from date of the allo has already file which are availa the relevant do
Infrastructure D
ITA
225 Taxman 123 (Delhi), whe been held to be date of purchase ate of registration of conveyance lied on the decision of the coor n the case of Anita D Kanja
015 for A.Y. 2011-12, wherein roperty has been held to be com the allotment letter. The Ld. cou nstant case those flats were 004-05 and, therefore, sale in th ong term capital gain, which ha assessee and hence no addition as required to be assessed in ry, Ld. DR relied on the orde rival submission of the parties a al on record. The issue in dispu holding period of the prope the date of the conveyance de tment letter. Firstly, in the ca ed the copy of the allotment le able on paper book pages 1 to 4
ocuments, we find that builde
Developers ltd. had allotted th
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
9
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
erein the date of e of the property e deed. The Ld.
rdinate bench of ani in ITA No.
also the holding mputed from the unsel submitted allotted in the he A.Y. 2010-11
as already been n for short term the year under er of the lower and perused the ute in the case is erty should be eed or from the ase the assessee etter of the flats
4. On perusal of er M/s Rashmi he two flat nos.
1404 and 1405
Agarwal under t
Anita D Kanjan held that the da for holding peri be treated as da the date on w entered into the sale of the prope registered for consideration b agreement for s
2009-10 corresp term capital ga term capital gai of the Act. The s is appearing in assessee and h
Assessing office computation of 11, but said as therefore, we ca assessing office declared in A.Y the sale of the ITA to the assessee along with his the sale part of the SRA scheme ni(supra), the coordinate bench ate of the allotment letter shoul od of the property. Therefore, ate of the purchase of the prope which the purchase deed of c e year under consideration. Sec erty is concerned though the pr the purchase and sale in t but the assessee had alread sale of flat No. 1404 and 1405 i ponding to A.Y. 2010-11 and de ain arising on sale and agains in the assessee claimed deduct said long term capital gain decl the copy of the return of inco his wife for the A.Y. 2010-1
er has pointed out certain m the deduction u/s 54F of the A ssessment year is not available an’t go into correctness of the r cannot ignore the said long te
Y. 2010-11 and assessee the ga property in the year under c
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
10
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
wife, Smt. Lata e. In the case of h of the Tribunal ld be considered the said date to erty rather than conveyance was ondly, as far as roperty has been the year under dy entered into in financial year eclared the long st the said long ion u/s 54/54F lared by his wife ome filed by the 1. Though, the mistakes in the Act for AY 2010- e before us and, same. But the erm capital gain ain arising from consideration as short term capi of capital gain s for the assesse purchased thos scheme and no finding recorde incorrect.
8. In view of afore registration of t sale entered int any capital gain said transaction duly accepted b the assessee are 9. In the result the Order pronoun (RAHUL CHA
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 24/03/2025
Disha Raut
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
ITA ital gain, without any valid reas shown in AY 2010-11. Thirdly, ee has rightly pointed out th se flats under sale compone ot under the slum occupation d by the Assessing Officer to said discussion, we are of the o the flat No. 1404 and 1405 fo to the year under consideratio n tax as the assessee had alrea n of the sale in A.Y. 2010-11, w by the department. The grounds e accordingly allowed.
e appeal of the assessee is allow ced in the open Court on 24/0
- AUDHARY)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
11
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
son for rejection the Ld. counsel e assessee has nt of the SRA n category. The o that extent is opinion that the r purchase and on are liable for ady declared the which has been of the appeal of wed.
03/2025. d/-
KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file.
////
ITA
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu
Anil Murarilal Agarwal
12
A No. 4715/MUM/2024
R, gistrar) umbai