Case Law Details
Bhavin Piyushbhai Palkhiwala Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
The assessee was the joint-owner in 2 bungalows bearing No. 15 and 16 located at Ashwamegh Ahmedabad along with his family members. The assessee claimed to have relinquished his right in bungalow No. 15 without any consideration in favor of his relatives. However, the AO was of the view that the assessee received consideration of Rs. 27 Lacs on account of relinquishment of his right in the property which was not disclosed in the income tax return. Accordingly, the AO treated such sum of Rs. 27 Lacs as income of the assessee under the head capital gain. The learned CIT (A) subsequently confirmed the order of the AO.
Assessee has invested in another property dated 29-09-2009 bearing address Bungalow No. 16, Neelkanth Green Bungalow for rupees 93,00,000.00 in the year under consideration along other two co-owners being family members. Accordingly, the assessee claimed to have invested in his share the property for ₹31 lakhs only.
We are also conscious to the fact the relinquishment deed was made on 27/05/2008 FY 2008-09 corresponding to AY 2009-10 as evident from the relinquishment deed placed on pages 63 to 76 of the PB. Thus if any tax is required to be levied, then it has to be levied in the AY 2009-10.
In view of the above, we conclude that the assessee was entitled to the benefit under section 54 of the Act in the given facts and circumstances. Accordingly, we are not inclined to adjudicate other contentions raised by the assessee before the authorities below. Thus we reverse the order of the learned CIT (A) and direct the AO delete the addition made by him. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
