आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘DB-B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.925/Hyd/2025 (िनधा१रण वष१/Assessment Year: 2014-15)

ACIT Vs. M/s LAKSHMI CIRCLE-5(1), TECHNOSOLUTIONS HYDERABAD PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD PAN:

(Appellant) (Respondent)

िनधा१ौरती (cid:554)ारा/Assessee by: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate राज(cid:830) व (cid:554)ारा/Revenue by:: Dr.Narender Kumar Naik CIT(DR)

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 26/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 27/03/2025 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2014-15.

2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:

3. The assessee company is engaged in the business of BPO & Software Development Services, filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 17/02/2015 declaring loss of Rs.1,85,744/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on

19/05/2025 and no scrutiny assessment was made for the year under consideration. In the scrutiny assessment proceedings for the A.Y 2017-18 completed on 13/12/2019, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has sold 8 Flats for a total consideration of Rs.3,13,54,340/- and admitted the capital gain on the same. On further verification, the Assessing Officer observed that the Flats sold by the assessee during the financial year 2016-17 were received by the assessee on account of development agreement entered into by it with M/s. Sri Balajee Nirman & Estates, on 16/12/2013. Based on this fact of development agreement entered into by the assessee with M/s. Sri Balajee Nirman & Estates on 16/12/2013, duly registered with the Sub Registrar, the Assessing Officer was of the view that there was a transfer of capital asset in favour of the developer as the assessee was entitled to 47.5% of the total constructed area, whereas the developer shall be entitled to 52.5% of the constructed area out of the total built up area of the project. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 16/03/2021 and assessed the capital gain to the tune of Rs.32,52,59,750/-.

4. The assessee challenged the order of the Assessing Officer before the learned CIT (A). The learned CIT (A) vide the impugned order has held that there is no transfer of immovable property in terms of section 2(47)(v) of the Act as there was no transfer of possession of the land and ownership in favour of the developer vide the said joint development agreement dated

16/12/2013.

5. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the learned CIT (A), the Revenue has filed the present appeal.

6. Before the Tribunal, the learned DR has submitted that the possession of the land was handed over to the developer at the time of joint development agreement against the consideration of 47.5% of the built-up area of the project. The JDA is duly registered and therefore, in substance, it is a transfer of immovable property in terms of section 2(47)(v) r.w.s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Though the assessee has denied the handing over of the possession to the developer, but as a matter of fact, the possession was duly handed over to the developer at the time of JDA. Even the valuation of the property in question was also agreed upon between the parties. Thus, there is a transfer in terms of section 2(47)(v) r.w.s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. He has relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer.

7. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that as per the terms of the JDA dated 16/12/2013, the assessee would introduce the land on which the developer would develop and construct the residential flats. It was agreed between the parties that the assessee would be entitled to 47.5% and the developer will get 52.5% of the shares of the constructed a