INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5 (1), PUNE vs. VILAS B. RUKARI (HUF), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1607/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 September 2022AY 2008-098 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal lacked merit. It affirmed the CIT(A)'s findings, which were based on a previous decision of the Tribunal itself in the assessee's case for AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 1640/PUN/2014). In that prior decision, the Tribunal had determined that the receipts were advance receipts, and the business profits were taxable in the year the project was completed and tenements/flats were handed over to prospective buyers, which was AY 2011-12. The Tribunal found that the amount received in the year under appeal (AY 2008-09) was an advance that did not culminate in the completion of the transaction. Consequently, the addition made by the AO was deleted. The Tribunal adopted judicial consistency and dismissed the Revenue's sole substantive grievance.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for Assessment Year 2008-09, which reversed the Assessing Officer's (AO) finding that business receipts of Rs. 2,58,37,188/- were taxable. The dispute arose from a Development Agreement dated 24.02.2006 between the assessee (Vilas B. Rukari (HUF)) and J.K. Developers for developing agricultural land. The AO considered the transfer of immovable property complete upon registration of the Conveyance Deed and possession handover, deeming the receipts as business income. The assessee contended that the land was agricultural, permission for NA conversion was pending, and the consideration was indeterminate at the time of the agreement. The CIT(A) had granted partial relief. The Tribunal noted a previous decision for AY 2009-10 concerning similar issues.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal had to decide if the alleged business receipts of Rs. 2,58,37,188/- were taxable in the assessee's hands for AY 2008-09, as per Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contentions: - The land was agricultural, and permission for change to NA was required. - The consideration was indeterminate at the time of the Development Agreement. - Handing over possession was a temporary measure for construction. - A previous ITAT order for AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 1640/PUN/2014) held similar receipts as advance receipts, taxable in AY 2011-12 when the project was completed. Revenue's Contentions: - The AO rightly rejected the assessee's argument for invoking the project completion method. - The transfer of immovable property was complete upon registration of the Conveyance Deed and possession handover, as per clause 6 of the Development Agreement. - The assessee had not declared agricultural income previously.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM & SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Bora
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Hearing: 26.09.2022

आदेश की प्रधतधलधप अग्रेधषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A)-8 Pune. 4. The Pr.CIT-3, Pune. धवभागीय प्रधतधनधध, आयकर अपीलीय अधधकरण, “बी” बेंच, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गार्ा फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, 6. // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

Vilas B. Rukari (HUF), S.No. Details Date Initials 1 Draft dictated on 26.09.2022 2 Draft placed before author 28.09.2022 Draft proposed & placed before the Second 3 Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on 7 Date of uploading of Order 8 File sent to Bench Clerk 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →