Case Law Details
Case Name : Praveen Gupta Vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 2558/Del/2010
Date of Judgement/Order : 13/08/2010
Related Assessment Year : 2007- 08
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Ahmedabad
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
Now, coming to the question, which relates to the date from which the indexed cost of acquisition is to be computed. Here, it has been the case of the assessee that on the date of allotment of flat, the property was identified. The assessee got the right over the said property and from that d
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Reaction (impromptu):
The view canvassed on behalf of the taxpayer and accepted in second appeal is strikingly amazing; by any standard, is bound to go deep down in the history of tribunal decisions, – marking a clean departure from the thus far accepted, without blemish, concept of ‘BASE YEAR’ relevant for INDEXATION OF “COST OF ACQUISITION” of the ‘capital asset” !!!
The view taken accepting the apparently odd stance of the asessee, to put it with all humility but in the least offensive manner, seems to have the effect of shaking the very ‘base – of the legal concept of ‘BASE YEAR’- on which, one would have so far thought,- there was no scope whatsoever for any such view being canvassed much less accepted.
In one’s firm conviction,- had the scheme of the Act dealing with taxation of ‘capital gains’, so also the terms/language of the applicable sections, been properly read and understood, the view taken could have been just the opposite.
What all the more important in any such immovable property related issue is that,- the fundamental principles and their overriding implications of the ‘property law’ ought to be duly taken into consideration. As, the property herein is a ‘flat’, being a ‘UNIT’ OF A BUILDING, AS OPPOSED TO AN INDEPENDENT HOUSE PROPERTY, THE SPECIAL LAW EXCLUSIVELY APPLICABLE THERETO WOULD HAVE BEEN OF MORE RELEVANCE AND HENCE REQUIRED TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
ASIDE: WHOSOEVER SAID – LAW IS AN ‘ass’, would, in one’s belief, HAVE NONETHELESS HAD IN VISION A STILL ‘LIVE’ ass; certainly, not a ‘dead’ one, so as to deserve to be flogged (OR KICKED AT)according to one’s own will and wish OR whims and fancies.
In this context, one is provoked to observe that, in the newly conceived Real Estate BIll (still in the Draft stage), the term ‘ALLOTTEE’ has been very liberally used IN MANY CONTEXTS. It is anybody’s guess as to what is store for one and all concerned, including the tax gatherer; especially, wrt its own immense potentials for giving rise to disputes and inconclusive litigation; in one’s perception, that is not unlikely, in the event the term ‘allottee’, seemingly used in several places, without giving much thought, is going to be retained same way in the final enactment, and were to be relied on, for all related purposes, not barring TAXATION.
i have purchased a flat in jun,2010 and register it but i got the possession in nov.11(allotment letter on 4.11.11) now can i claim the benefit of exemption u/s 54 or not as it says that i have to purchase a flat one year before or 2 year after but in my case the period is more than one year before.
and now i am selling my old flat ,purchased in 1992.
can i rely on this case and claim exemption of buying a residential premises
please reply
considering as urgent