I.  A Useful Presentation on:

CAPITAL GAINS - Under Income Tax Act, 1961 (as amended by Finance Act, 2012)

(Please click here)

II.  Useful Case laws :

1.   M/s All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd.  Vs. DCIT, ITA No. 5018 to 5022 & 5059/M/2010, Date of Pronouncement: 06/07/2012, ITAT- Mumbai

Issue:

• Whether an assessment u/s 153A encompassed additions not based on any incriminating material found during the search and

• Whether a “Container Freight Station” was an “Inland Port/ Infrastructure facility” for purposes of deduction u/s 80IA(4). HELD by the Special Bench:

(i)  In assessments that are abated, the AO retains the original jurisdiction as well as the jurisdiction conferred on him by section 153A for which assessments shall be made for each of the 6 assessment years separately;

(ii)  In other cases, in addition to the income that has already been assessed, the assessment u/s 153A will be made on the basis of incriminating material i.e. (a) the books of accounts and other documents found in the course of the search but not produced in the course of original assessment and (b) undisclosed income or property disclosed in the course of search;

(iii)  A Container Freight Station, like an Inland Container Depot, is an “Inland Port” having regard to the fact that it is referred to as such in the statutory provisions and in the understanding of the CBEC, which administers the Customs Act. It has also been treated as part of the customs port for purpose of customs formalities and clearances. Accordingly, it is an “infrastructure facility” for purposes of section 80IA(4)

(Please click here for judgment)

2.  Shri Chimanlal Manilal Patel Vs. ACIT, ITA No. 508/Ahd/2010, Date of Pronouncement: 22/06/2012, ITAT- Ahmedabad

Whether AO can initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for the reason that the assessee in the original return had not shown capital gains as per the provisions of section 50C.

Held:

It is a fact that the addition has been made by the AO in the revisionary proceedings. The addition has been made on the basis of provisions of section 50C. It is not the case of the AO that the assessee has received consideration over and above than that declared in the sales deed. The AO has not disputed the consideration received by the assessee. The addition has been made on the basis of deeming provisions of section 50C. The assessee has furnished all the facts of sale, documents/ material before the AO. The AO has not doubted the genuineness of the documents/details furnished by the assessee. Only because the assessee agreed to the additions because of the deeming provisions it cannot be construed to be filing of inaccurate particulars on the part of the assessee. The assessee agreed to addition on the basis of valuation made by the stamp valuation authority cannot be a conclusive proof that the sale consideration as per the sale agreement is seemed to be incorrect and wrong. In view of these facts we are of the considered view that penalty cannot be levied on the basis of deeming provision. We accordingly delete the same.

(Please click here for judgment)

Key of Success :

"A person can never forget two faces in his whole life,
the one who had held his hands in his difficult time and 
the other one who left him alone in his difficult time" 

Thanks for your valuable time

"Voice of CA"