Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sama Om Reddy Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 2225/HYD/2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 29/04/2020
Related Assessment Year : 2012-13
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Sama Om Reddy Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)

Ld.Counsel for the assessee had reiterated the submissions made by the assessee before the AO and has submitted that by virtue of the Agreement of Sale cum GPA and handing over of the possession, the assessee had transferred the property in favour of the Vendee/GPA-holder, Shri A.Manikyam. It is submitted that the assessee had received the entire sale consideration of Rs.5,94,000/- and had also handedover the vacant possession of the property to the Vendee. Therefore, according to him, the transfer was complete in 2006 itself. It is submitted that it was in the year 2012 that the AGPA-holder had sold the property to another person and the assessee’s name has only been included as the Vendor, but the document neither contained the signature of the assessee nor the assessee has received any sale consideration. Therefore, according to him, the Long Term Capital Gain cannot be brought to tax in the hands of assessee in the relevant assessment year.

By virtue of the AGPA dt.29-11-2006, the assessee has parted with his right in the property because he had received the entire sale consideration of Rs. 5,94,000/- as agreed to between both the parties and has also handedover the vacant possession of the property to the Vendee therein. It is also stated therein that the GPA is given to the Vendee for the convenience of the purchaser for doing the necessary acts and things on behalf of the Vendor and the Vendee therein. Since the Vendee has paid the entire sale consideration and has taken possession of the property, the Vendee becomes the owner of the property u/s.53A of the TP Act and u/s.2(47) of the IT Act, it is a transfer of the property. The Vendee has executed the Sale Deed by virtue of the said AGPA, as he has sold the property to another party for Rs.9,90,000/-. The sale of the property by the Vendee cum AGPA-holder cannot be considered as sale of property by the assessee. Further, it is worth noting that except being described as the Vendor, the assessee is neither a signatory to the subsequent Sale Deed nor is he the recipient of any of the sale consideration. In view of the same, it is held that the assessee is not liable for tax on any capital gain arising out of transfer of property vide Document No.1610/2012, dt.14-03-2012. Accordingly, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

This is assessee’s appeal for the AY.2012-13, directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Hyderabad, dated 29-10-2018.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031