This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Addition for Capital Gain cannot be made for merely signing as a Confirming Party
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Income Tax Officer Vs Late Smt. Seema Mukharjee (ITAT Jaipur)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2008-09
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Jaipur
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Advertisement
ITO Vs Late Smt. Seema Mukharjee (ITAT Jaipur)
It has been clearly mentioned that the capital gain income has been declared in the return of income of Smt. Gyanwati Dhakar, who has actually sold this property. The assessee has just signed as a confirming party.
Even otherwise, independent of the computation of income of Smt. Gyanwati Dhakar for the AY 2008-09, it is evident that the property was not sold by the appellant as the AO has failed to brought on record that the sale consideration of Rs. 45 Lac was received by the appellant or used directly or indirectly for its bene...
