Income Tax : Discover the real implications of Section 50C and significant court rulings affecting real income taxation. Explore crucial tax de...
Income Tax : Learn about tax implications for sellers and buyers of immovable property. Understand capital gains, stamp duty, tax withholding, ...
Income Tax : Understand how Sec 50C & 43CA of Income Tax Act affect taxation of immovable property sales. Learn about capital gains, business i...
Income Tax : Income-Tax Implications for the Sellers, if any Immovable Property is Sold for a consideration less than Stamp Duty Value...
Income Tax : Understand the income tax provisions for cash transactions in the agriculture sector. Learn how farmers can protect their interest...
Income Tax : Bombay Chartered Accountants' Society has made a Representation on 'Suggestions for Amendments in the Income Tax Act', on 24th May...
Income Tax : In relation to computing capital gains tax liability on transfer of land or building, amendment made via the Finance Act, 2016 giv...
Income Tax : Rationalisation Of Section 50c To Provide Relief Where Sale Consideration Fixed Under Agreement To Sell- Section 50C makes a spec...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act does not apply to developer who has taken over the poss...
Income Tax : Once an assessment has been finalized for a particular year, reassessment cannot be justified merely due to subsequent procedural ...
Income Tax : Section 50C not applies if transfer of capital asset took place as per approval and under the supervision of the statutory authori...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai rules on DCIT vs Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council case, clarifying exhibition activities are not trade and c...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi rules that Section 50C deeming provisions cannot be applied to leasehold rights in the Shivdeep Tyagi vs ITO case....
Income Tax : Notification No. 8/2020-Income-Tax- CBDT has notified Other electronic modes by inserting New Income TAx Rule 6ABBA. It also amend...
According to decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case where addition is made on account of application of section 50C and Revenue failed to produce any evidence to the effect that assessee has actually received more amount than that shown by it on the sale of property then penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied.
Presumably, the case of the assessee was that price offered by the buyer was the highest prevailing price in the market. If this is his case then it is difficult to accept the proposition that the assessee had accepted that the price fixed by the District Sub Registrar was the fair market value
Assessee can claim exemption under section 54EC on transfer of depreciable assets held for more than thirty-six months by investing in bonds notified for the purpose of Section 54EC. Further the assessee can claim exemption upto Rs. 1,00,00,000/- by investing the gain in the bonds notified under section 54EC if he invests Rs. 50,00,000/- each in two separate financial years but within six months from the date of transfer.
Section 50C is not final determination to prove that it is a case of escapement of income. The report of approved valuer may give estimated figure on the basis of facts of each case. Therefore, on mere applicability of section 50C would not disclose any escapement of income in the facts and circumstances of the case.
We are of the view that whenever objection is taken or claim is made before AO, that the value adopted or assessed or assessabe by the Stamp Valuation Authority under sub-section (1) of Section 50-C exceeds the fair market value of the property on the date of transfer
Assessee has sold/transferred a lease hold landed property at 36, SSGT road, Industrial area, Ghaziabad at a consideration of Rs.3,25,00,000/- to Sara exports Ltd. The said lease hold property was acquired by the assessee way back in 1971 as per the original elase deed dt. 26.8.71
The assessee sold the property at a sum of Rs.2,51,50,000/- For the purpose of stamp duty, however, the value was estimated at a sum of Rs.5, 19,77,000/- and on that basis the stamp duty was realized. During the assessment, it was found that the assessee had disclosed the sale price
The fact remains that the actual amount received was offered for taxation. It is only on the basis of the deemed consideration that the proceedings under s. 271(1)((c) started. The Revenue has failed to produce any iota of evidence that the assessee actually received one paise more than the amount shown to have been received by him.
Thus obviously, it is only on account of deeming provisions of section 50C, the AO has made the addition by adopting the sale consideration of Rs.5, 19,77,000/-, being the value adopted for the purpose of stamp valuation. The revenue has also not shown as to how the assessee could be held to have actually received this amount which is in excess of the amount of Rs.2,51,50,000/-.
Even otherwise, we are of the firm view that the insertion of words or assessable by amending Section 50C with effect from 01.10.2009 is neither a clarification nor an explanation to the already existing provision and it is only an inclusion of new class of transactions namely the transfers of properties without or before registration. Before introducing the said amendment, only the transfers of properties where the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority were subjected to Section 50C application. However after introduction of the words “or assessable” after the words “adopted or assessed”, such transfers where the value assessable by the stamp valuation authority are also brought into the ambit of Section 50C. Thus such introduction of new set of class of transfer would certainly have the prospective application only and not otherwise. Hence the assessee’s transfer admittedly made earlier to such amendment cannot be brought under Section 50C.
