Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Redevelopment Capital Gains Cannot Be Taxed in Society’s Hands: ITAT Mumbai

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2026 taxguru.in 13426
Case Name
Hardinge House Co Op Hsg Soc Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number
Premium Access
Date of Judgement/Order
Premium Access
Related Assessment Year
2016-17
Subscribe to download.

Already Upgraded? Log in.

Advertisement

Hardinge House Co Op Hsg Soc Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Summary: The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal of Hardinge House Co Op Hsg Soc Limited for Assessment Year 2016-17 and deleted the addition of ₹18,40,18,300/- made as long-term capital gains in the hands of the cooperative housing society in connection with redevelopment of its property. The assessment had been completed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 after the Assessing Officer relied upon Annual Information Return information showing immovable property transactions aggregating to ₹18,40,18,300/- under the society’s PAN. The society consisted of 14 members and had returned total income of ₹91,000/-. The assessee submitted that it had entered into a Development Agreement with Sambhavparshva Developers Pvt. Ltd. and had granted only redevelopment rights, while continuing to remain the owner of the land.

It contended that it had received no sale consideration from the developer and that the Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements were entered into between the developer and individual members, with the society acting only as a confirming party. The Tribunal examined the Development Agreement, including clauses recording that the society represented its members, and the schedules identifying the members, their existing premises, hardship compensation and displacement compensation. It also considered the Maharashtra Government directive issued under section 79A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, including Clause 11 concerning redevelopment agreements. The Tribunal found that the society had executed the development agreement as a representative of its members and that no part of the sale consideration had been received in the society’s bank account. It held that direct tax liability could not be transferred or foisted upon another entity where the underlying transaction demonstrated that the rights in the flats belonged to the individual members.

Want to Read the Complete Judgment?

You have read the free case summary. Unlock the full judgment, the detailed judicial reasoning and the downloadable PDF, along with every other premium judgment on TaxGuru.

Read on with Premium
Goes straight to payment. GST invoice included.

One subscription covers the entire premium judgment library, not just this case.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: Graduate, CA in Job / Business, DD
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 23,806

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.