Unregistered Collaboration agreement will not qualify for "tranfer" of capital asset u/s 2(47)(v) for charging capital gains under Income Tax Act,1961.

Last updated: 20 January 2021

Court :
ITAT New Delhi

Brief :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-32, New Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2007-08 dated 09th December, 2016.

Citation :
ITA. No.1745/Del/2017

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(Through Video Conferencing)

ITA. No.1745/Del/2017
(Assessment Year: 2007-08)

Namita Dutta,
F–67, Poorvi Marg, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi – 110 057.
PAN: AENPD3423P
(Appellant)

Vs.

ITO,
Ward-72 (2),
New Delhi.
(Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Adv.; &
Shri Akshit Jain, C.A.;
Revenue by: Ms. Aman Preet, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 23/12/2020
Date of pronouncement 28/12/2020

O R D E R

PER Prashant Maharishi A M

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-32, New Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2007-08 dated 09th December, 2016.

2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

i. on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned CIT (appeals) is bad both in law and on facts.

ii. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the calculation of indexed cost, made by the learned CIT – A amounting to ₹ 610,879 by the CIT(A) against the indexed cost of acquisition of ₹ 5,682,912/– claimed by the assessee, is untenable in the eyes of the law

iii. on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT – A haserred by not allowing the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 54 of the income tax act amounting to ₹ 5,317,088/-.

To know more in details find the attachment file