Click Here For Best Books On Taxation & Law. Upto 60% Off On Select Titles. Free Shipping & Pay On Delivery!
 

Click Here To Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter

Home › All Judgements › ITO vs. Lotia Co.op Hsg. Soc. (ITAT Mumbai)

ITO vs. Lotia Co.op Hsg. Soc. (ITAT Mumbai)

Posted on by editor
COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: August 22, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

Where the assessee was a co.op society and it and its members entered into a development agreement with a builder pursuant to which Tranferable Development Rights (TDR) entitled to be received under the Development Control Regulations was assigned to the developer for the repairs and redevelopment of the building and the construction of additional floors, held that the TDRs were owned by the flat owners individually and as no consideration for the transfer of the TDRs was received by the assessee society nor any area in the constructed portion was allocated to the assessee society, it was not chargeable to tax. Noted that even in the case of flat owners the Mumbai Bench had held in Jethalal D. Mehta vs. DCIT (2005) 2 SOT 422 that the receipts on sale of TDRs were not chargeable to tax in their hands.

Related Posts:

  • V.R.Enterprises vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The assessee was in possession of primary purchase documents and the payments to the suppliers was through banking channels. The assessee had established corresponding sales before Ld. AO. The books of accounts were audited wherein quantitative details of stock was provided. We are of the considered opinion that there could…
  • Kaybee Pvt Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Section 92A(2) governs the operation of Section 92A(1) by controlling the definition of participation in management or capital or control by one of the enterprise in the other enterprise. If a form of participation in management, capital or control is not recognized by Section 92A(2), even if it ends up…
  • Unnikrishnan V S vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) We find that so far as the ESOP benefit is concerned, while the income has arisen to the assessee in the current year, admittedly the related rights were granted to the assessee in 2007 and in consideration for the services which were rendered by the assessee prior to the rights…
  • ITO vs. Iraisaa Hotels Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) After the passing of the order of the Tribunal the Department has come forward with the final order of the SEBI by stating that, though, it was available at the time of hearing of appeal but it could not be brought to the notice of the Tribunal. Thus, as could…
  • ITO vs. Arihant Estates Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) In the case on hand before us it is an undisputed fact that both assessees have treated the unsold flats as stock in trade in the books of account and the flats sold by them were assessed under the head ‘income from business’. Thus, respectfully following the above said decisions…
  • Mahesh H. Hinduja vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) There is no bar / restriction in the provisions of section 139(5) of the Act that the assessee cannot file a revised return of income after issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. It is trite law, the assessee can file a revised return of income even in…

Related Judgements

  1. ITO vs. Ellora Silk Mills (ITAT Mumbai) 

    (i) Where the AO had accepted in the past that the warehousing charges received by the assessee was business income, he was not justified in reopening the assessment to assess the charges as property income in the absense of any … ITO vs. Ellora Silk Mills (ITAT Mumbai)…
  2. Narang Overseas vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai 5 Member Special Bench) 

    (i) The judgement of the SC in Mariappa Gounder vs. CIT 232 ITR 2 does not decide whether mesne profits received against wrongful possession of property is in the nature of revenue receipt or capital receipt. It merely decides the … Narang Overseas vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai 5…
  3. Development Consultants vs. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) 

    Where the assessee entered into “international transactions” with “associated enterprises” and the AO made adjustments to the arms length price, held, deleting the adjustments that:

    (i) In order to determine the most appropriate method for determining the arm’s length price, it is first necessary to select the ‘tested party’ and…
  4. M/s B. G. Chitale vs. DCIT (ITAT Pune – Special Bench) 

    The process of pasteurisation of milk does not amount to manufacture / processing for purposes of sections 80-I and 80-HHA as while pastuerised milk is improved in quality, it is not a commercially different product as compared to raw milk.
    Read more ›
  5. Glenmark Laboratory vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) 

    For purposes of s. 80HHC, the direct cost attributable to the earning of the DEPB license (equal to the value of the license on the date of receipt) has to be reduced from the direct cost of trading goods on … Glenmark Laboratory vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Read…
0 comments on “ITO vs. Lotia Co.op Hsg. Soc. (ITAT Mumbai)”
1 Pings/Trackbacks for "ITO vs. Lotia Co.op Hsg. Soc. (ITAT Mumbai)"
  1. archives » Blog Archive » New Shailaja CHS vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) says:
    January 28, 2009 at 9:06 pm

    […] ITO vs. Lotia Co.op Hsg. Soc. (ITAT Mumbai) Posted in All Judgements, Tribunal […]