SARIKA PANKAJ NAVLAKHA,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (2), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1768/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2022AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the transfer of the capital asset should be recognized from the date of the agreement and the first installment, not the date of possession. Therefore, the capital gain should be computed as long-term.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased a flat on 17.02.2011, paid an initial installment on the same date, and took possession on 17.12.2013. The Assessing Officer treated the capital gain as short-term, considering the date of possession.

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the holding period of the capital asset for calculating capital gains should commence from the date of the agreement and initial payment or the date of possession.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI S. S. GODARA

For Appellant: Smt. J. R. Chandekar
For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Hearing: 24.05.2022Pronounced: 26.05.2022

ORDER

PER S. S. GODARA, JM:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against the CIT(A)-1 Pune’s order dated 23.09.2019 passed in case no.PN/CIT(A)-1/ITO,Wd.11(2)/PN/712/16-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short the Act. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to sole substantive issue between the parties regarding the assessee’s holding period of the capital asset forming subject matter of transfer herein, it emerges that the CIT(A) has affirmed the assessment findings holding her to have transferred a short term capital asset as follows :-

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →