Material Research Instruments Vs. ACIT-Circle 16(2), Mumbai

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Late Shri Nitin Parikh was the owner of an office premises situated at 63-B, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, Mumbai. Upon his demise on 28.01.1986, the property devolved upon his wife Smt. Usha Parikh and his daughters Smt. Bela Mehta and Ms. Bina Parikh. The property was ultimately transferred to Shri Suresh Jain by way of an agreement for sale dated 05.08.2005 for a total consideration of ₹69,76,689/-. The entire sale consideration was paid and received on the very date of execution of the agreement, and possession of the property was also handed over contemporaneously. The agreement stipulated that the responsibility of registration and payment of stamp duty would rest entirely upon the purchaser. The document was registered in 2009, by which time the stamp duty valuation had escalated to ₹1,17,18,000/- owing to revision of ready reckoner rates.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
• 2. Adoption of stamp duty value as the full value of consideration under section 50C
• 3. Determination of cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 for the purposes of computing long-term capital gains

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Sarayu Krishna Kamat vs DCIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench 'G', Mumbai benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Amit Girdharbhai Patel vs. ACIT

  Ahmedabad bench

• Bhushan Vasant Parelkar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(2)(1), Mumbai

• Swapnal Subhash Anbhavane Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward

• Vishal Bhutani v. ACIT, Central Circle-3 & ITO, Ward-1

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2019-20Partly Allowed

• Mahendra Manshi Nagda vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai “D” Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed