ITA NO.1082/AHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM] ITA NO.1082/AHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PARULBEN S SHAH, ...... ...... APPELLANT 6, YOGESHWAR SOCIETY, PALDI, AHMEDABAD 380 007. [PAN: APFPS 2926 F] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(2), AHMEDABAD. ....................... RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: S.N. DIVATIA FOR THE APPELLANT SHIVASEWAK FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 08.10.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 15.10.2018 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HA S CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 24 TH MARCH, 2015 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), IN THE M ATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. GRIEVANCES OF THE ASSESSEE, IN SUBSTANCE, ARE TH AT (A) LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE DATE OF ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERT Y SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN IS 16.11.1998 (I.E. DATE OF REGISTRATION OF P URCHASE DATE) AND NOT 22.07.1997 (I.E. THE DATE ON WHICH PURCHASE DEED WAS ENTERED INTO) A ND THE INDEXED BENEFIT WAS THUS WRONGLY GIVEN AS FOR F.Y. 1998-99 AS AGAINST F.Y. 1 997-98; AND (B) LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DECLINING ADJUSTMENT OF RS.5,00,000/- TOWA RDS COST OF IMPROVEMENT OF THE FLAT SOLD. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE ON THE IDENTIFICATION OF ABOVE ISSUES REQUIRING MY ADJUDICATION. 3. SO FAR AS THE FIRST ISSUE IS CONCERNED, THE RELE VANT MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR, THE ASSESSEE SOL D A RESIDENTIAL FLAT. THIS FLAT WAS PURCHASED BY HIM VIDE PURCHASE DEED DATED 22.07.199 7 WHICH WAS REGISTERED, IN SUB- REGISTRARS OFFICE ON 16.11.1998. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ITS THE DATE OF REGISTRATION OF A DOCUMENT WHICH REALLY MATTERS, AND, ACCORDINGLY, FINANCIAL YEAR 1998- 99 IS TREATED AS THE YEAR IN WHICH ASSET WAS ACQUIR ED, AND THE INDEXATION WAS COMPUTED ITA NO.1082/AHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 ACCORDINGLY. THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, CONT ENDS THAT WHEN SALE DEED WAS SIGNED, ENTIRE CONSIDERATION WAS PAID AND POSSESSIO N WAS TAKEN, IT IS THE DATE OF PURCHASE DEED WHICH SHOULD GOVERN THE DATE OF ACQUI SITION. THE ASSESSEE IS THUS IN APPEAL BEFORE ME. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE AP PLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 5. I HAVE NOTED THAT IT IS NOT EVEN IN DISPUTE THAT ENTIRE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION OF RS.9,00,000/- WAS PAID, VIDE CHEQUES DATED 2 ND MAY 1997, AND THE DEED WAS ENTERED INTO ON 22 ND JULY 1997, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ADMITTEDLY REGISTERE D MUCH LATER ON 16.11.1998. THE MERE FACT THAT REGISTRATION HAS TA KEN PLACE ON A LATER DATE DOES NOT OBLITERATE THE FACT THAT PURCHASE DEED WAS EXECUTED ON 22.07.1997, AND RATHER RATIFIES THAT ACT AND RELATES BACK TO THAT TRANSACTION. I, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO GIVE I NDEXATION BENEFIT FOR COST OF PURCHASES BY TREATING 22.07.1997 AS DATE OF ACQUISI TION. TO THIS EXTENT, PLEA OF THE APPELLANT IS UPHELD. 6. AS REGARDS THE CLAIM FOR ALLEGED COST OF IMPROVE MENT AT RS.5,00,000/-, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY CONCEDED HIS INABIL ITY TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING, IN EVEN INDICATING, COST OF IMPROVEME NT. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THIS PLEA IS REJECTED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN T HE ABOVE TERMS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 15 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018. SD/- PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: AHMEDABAD, THE 15 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018. PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD