SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

R.S.SYAL, VIJAY PAL RAO
Mrs. Bertha T. Almeida – Appellant
Versus
Income-tax Officer, Ward 24(1)(3) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Harish Mothiwalla,P.C. Mourya

ORDER

R.S. Syal, Accountant Member. - This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on 11.09.2008 in relation to the assessment year 2001-02.

2. The learned Counsel for the assessee filed application for admission of the following additional ground reading as under :-

"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) XXIV, Mumbai, erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in respect of charging receipt of Rs. 20,00,000 and notional market value of flat amounting to Rs. 19,06,800 to be received from developers under the head "Capital Gains", particularly when, the developer has not fulfilled the conditions stated in Agreement for development dated November 11, 1999 and thus not complied with requirements of Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act and therefore the transaction is not covered by section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961."

3. In support of the admission of this additional ground, the learned A.R. submitted that it involved only adjudication of substantial question of law and no fresh facts were required to be examined. The learned Departmental R

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top