Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

I.T.A. No. 332/Ind/2013 and C.O. No. 66/Ind/2013 (Arising out of I.T.A. No. 332/Ind/2013), (Assessment Year: 2009-10). Case: 1. ACIT, 1(2), 2. Shri Prakash Bhojwani Vs 1. Shri Prakash Bhojwani , 2. ACIT, 1(2). ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal)

Document Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Case Number:I.T.A. No. 332/Ind/2013 and C.O. No. 66/Ind/2013 (Arising out of I.T.A. No. 332/Ind/2013), (Assessment Year: 2009-10)
Party Name:1. ACIT, 1(2), 2. Shri Prakash Bhojwani Vs 1. Shri Prakash Bhojwani , 2. ACIT, 1(2)
Counsel:For Department: Shri R.A. Verma, Sr. DR and For Respondents: Shri R.N. Gupta, C.A.
Judges:Joginder Singh, Member (J) and R.C. Sharma, Member (A)
Issue:Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 139(1), 143(3), 50C, 50C(ii), 54-F, 54F, 54F(1)(b), 70
Judgement Date:October 31, 2013
Court:ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal)

Order:

R.C. Sharma, Member (A), (ITAT Indore Bench)

1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and cross objection by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) dated 8th February, 2013, for the assessment year 2009-10, in the matter of order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Following grounds have been taken by the Revenue:-

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in:

1. directing the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption of Rs. 11,29,925/- u/s. 54F(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

2. directing the Assessing Officer to allow set off of loss of Rs. 5,24,084/- against long term capital gain.

2. In the cross objection, the assessee is aggrieved for not giving benefit of cost of improvement of Rs. 5,02,808/-, while computing capital gains.

3. Rival contentions have been considered and records perused. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual and proprietor of M/s. Unique Associates engaged in the business of derivative (Future & Options) from BSE & NSE. The return of income was filed electronically on 30.09.2009 declaring income of Rs. 4,72,144/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had filed revised computation of total income. In the said revised computation, the assessee disclosed income after claiming exemption u/s. 54F from long term capital gain on sale of land at Rs. 1,20,45,090/-. The assessee, therefore, as per the revised computation, computed total income at Rs. 1,25,17,230/-.Subsequently, the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act 1961 on 30.12.2011, determining the total income at Rs. 1,40,97,190/-.

4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. computed long term capital gain at Rs. 1,36,25,043/- as against Rs. 1,25,17,230/- computed by the assessee. The total income in this year, therefore, was assessed at Rs. 1,40,97,190/- (472144 + 13625043). The higher assessment of long term capital gain is due to the reasons (i) Sale value as per Instrument of Transfer is Rs. 1,41,64,000/- but the A.O. adopted the sale consideration at Rs. 1,41,73,000 u/s. 50C(ii) The indexed cost of improvement incurred by assessee has not been allowed and (iii) The exemption claimed u/s. 54F has been denied.

5. The A.O. stated in his order that as per the AIR information available on record, the assessee has immovable property of Rs. 1,41,73,000/-; that in the return of income filed by the assessee u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. Act...

To continue reading

Request your trial