Case Law Details
Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Assessee contended that he was not the owner of the property sold and he executed sale deed on behalf of owner Shri Ashok Kumar Garg and, therefore, fasting tax liability on account of short term or long term capital gain on the shoulders of the assessee is not valid.
Assessee, despite several directions by the AO, did not produce any documentary evidence to show that the entire sale consideration received by him was transferred to the original owner Shri Ashok Kumar Garg who gave him power of attorney for execution of sale deed.
Even despite due service of notice through postal department the assessee has not appeared himself or through any Counsel or Authorized Representative before this Bench. The benefit of the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. C. Sugumaran [2015] 57 com 20 (Mad.) is available for the assessee only when the assessee successfully prove that he was merely an executor of sale deed in the capacity of Power of Attorney holder, on behalf of the original owner/seller and entire sale consideration has been transferred to the original owner/seller. The assessee has failed to prove these relevant facts. Therefore, benefit of said judgment is not available for the assessee in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case. Accordingly, grounds of assessee being devoid of merits are dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
