Sumeru Soft P. Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 423 ITR 518/195 DTR 267 (Mad)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment —Capital gains- Joint venture agreement with developer-Handing over possession of property and accepting refundable deposit — Matter Remanded to Assessing Officer. [ 2(47)(v), 45, 147, 148 , Transfer of Property Act 1882 , S.53A ]

The assessee entered into a joint venture agreement with a developer and received a refundable deposit. Possession and development rights were given in the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2007-08. The AO reopened  the assessment on the ground that the joint venture resulted in long-term capital gains to the assessee and was not offered to tax. The CIT (A )  considered the fact that the owners had allowed the developer to enter upon the project of the land for the purpose of construction, open the site office and raise any loan for development and construction of the project from any financial institutions. The CIT (A)  held that in pursuance of the agreement, possession was given in part performance of the contract, that the liability to capital gains tax arose upon handing over possession and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Both the assessee and the Department filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that according to the Explanation under section 147 due to non-disclosure of capital gains by the assessee the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The Tribunal recorded a finding that there was a transfer under s.  2(47)(v) since possession and control of the property already vested with the transfer and that apart, the joint development agreement was not cancelled and was still in operation. With regard to the quantification of the capital gains the Tribunal remanded the appeals to the AO for fresh consideration as to the computation of the capital gains. On appeal the Court held that , the reopening of the assessment under S. 147 of the Act depended upon the facts and circumstances of each case and therefore, could not be construed as a substantial question of law. The matter was remanded to the AO to decide the issue  as per the ratio in  CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini [2017] 398 ITR 531 (SC) as affirmed in Seshasayee Steels P.Ltd  v. ACIT (2020)421 ITR 46 (SC) the questions regarding the transfer exigible to tax with reference to S.2(47)(v) of Act read with section 53A of the 1882 Act . ( AY.2007-08)