DCIT, Jaipur V. SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR, Jaipur

ITA 881/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5306 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R PAREEK
• Assessee Lawyers: G G MUNDRA
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 881/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR, P/O-M/S HOTEL SHALIMAR, VANASTHALI MARG, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABIPG 1415 C VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 880/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR, P/O-M/S HOTEL SHALIMAR, VANASTHALI MARG, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABIPG 1416 B VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI G.R. PAREEK (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.G. MUNDRA (CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 05/04/2016 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/05/2016 ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 2 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11/09/2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR F OR A.Y. 2006-07. THE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEALS ARE AS UNDER:- GROUND OF ITA 881/JP/2012 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, LD CIT(A), IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 63,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN MADE BY THE A.O. GROUND OF ITA 880/JP/2012 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, LD CIT(A), IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,07,31,219/- ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TE RM CAPITAL GAIN MADE BY THE A.O. 2. THE REVENUE SOLE GROUND IN BOTH THE APPEAL IS AGA INST DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 63.00 LACS IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR AND RS. 1,07,31,219/- IN THE CASE OF IQBAL SINGH GAMBHI R ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THE ASSESSEES FILED THEIR RETURN ON 31/01/2007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,56,430/- IN THE CASE OF RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR AND RS. 4,19,28,570/- IN THE CASE OF IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR. IN THESE CASES, SCRUTINY WAS MADE U/S 143(3) OF THE INC OME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) ON 12/12/2008 AND INCOME WAS ASSE SSED IN THE CASE OF RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR AT RS. 1,26,56,430/- AND RS. 4, 19,28,576/- IN THE ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 3 CASE OF IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR. LATER ON IT WAS NOTICED THAT RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR HAD SHOWN RS. 61 LACS EACH FROM SALE OF SHAR ES FROM M/S GAMBHIR LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. IT IS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS SOLD 5000 EACH SHARES @ 80/- PER SHARE TO SHRI GYAN CHAND AGARWAL FOR CONSIDERATION OF RS. 4.00 LACS AND 1.50 LACS SHARES HAVE BEEN SOLD TO M/S HANSA TEXTRADE PVT. LTD. @ 80/- PER SHARE FOR TOTAL C ONSIDERATION OF RS. 1.20 CRORES, THUS TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION OF 1,55, 000 SHARES COMES TO RS. 1.24 CRORES IN THE CASE OF RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR AND 1,50,000 SHARES WERE SOLD @ 80/- PER SHARE TO M/S NARAYANA COLONIZERS PVT. LTD. FOR CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1.20 CRORES. THUS TOTAL CONSIDE RATION OF RS. 1,55,000 SHARES COMES TO RS. 1.24 CRORES. HOWEVER, THE ASSESS EE HAD DISCLOSED SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 61.00 LACS ONLY. THEREFORE , BOTH THE ASSESSEES HAD DISCLOSED LESS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN BY 60.00 LACS EACH. FURTHER IN CASE OF IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR, SALE OF 45,000 SHARES OF M/S BMG REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD. WERE SOLD TO M/S KARWASARA DEVELOPER S P. LTD., COST OF 40,000 SHARES @ 10/- EACH SHARE HAD BEEN TAKEN AT RS. 40,00,000/- AS AGAINST THE CORRECT FIGURE OF RS. 4.00 LACS. THE ASS ESSEE IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR HAD ALSO SHOWN LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SAL E OF THREE PLOTS OF LAND BUT FULL INDEXED COST CLAIMED ON PROPERTY AT P LOT NO. 18 SANSAR CHANDRA ROAD, JAIPUR PURCHASED IN JOINT NAME. THEREA FTER IN BOTH THE ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 4 CASES, NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED AND PRO CEEDING BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE CA SE OF G.K.N. DRIVESHEFT (INDIA) LTD. VS. ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19 ( SC) WERE COMPLETED. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER COMPUTED THE CAPITAL GAIN O N SHARES AND ADDITION IN THE CASE OF RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR WAS MADE AT RS. 63 LACS AND IN THE CASE OF IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR MADE ADDITIO N OF RS. 1,07,31,219/-. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), WHO HAD ALL OWED BOTH THE APPEALS BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- FINDING OF THE LD CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF RAM PRAKAS H GAMBHIR I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND T HE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR AND CONCUR WITH THE SUBMISSION OF THE AR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE AR SUBMITTED COPIES OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS, LED GER ACCOUNTS FROM WHERE THE PREMIUM PAID WAS REFLECTED. COPY OF FORM NO. 2 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 SHOWING RETURN OF ALLOTMENTS WAS ALSO FILED WHEREIN DETAILS OF PREMIUM PAID ON SHARES WAS ALSO REFLECTED . 2. ALL THESE DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 3 BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATED ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 5 12/08/2011. THEREFORE, THE OBSERVATION OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER THAT EVIDENCE REGARDING SOURCE OF PAYMENT A ND COPIES OF BANK ACCOUNTS WERE NOT FURNISHED BEFORE HE R DURING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CORRECT. 3. GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE PAYMENT OF THE PREMIUM I S REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE A ND WAS PAID VIDE CHEQUE FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND WAS DULY SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMPANY AFFAIRS VIDE FORM NO. 2 FILED ON 03/03/2005 IT IS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INDEED PAID A PREMIUM OF RS.40/- PER SHARE ON THE ACQUISITION OF THESE SHARES. THEREFORE, ON VERIFICATION OF THE FACTS FROM THE EV IDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORD THE OBSERVATION OF THE AO THAT THE PREMIUM WAS NOT PAID BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT FOUND TO BE CORRECT AND THE ADDITION OF RS.63,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF TAKING THE COST OF ACQUISITION OF SHARES AT RS.15,00,000/- INSTEAD OF RS.75,00,000/- IS DELETED . FINDING OF THE LD CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND T HE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR AND CONCUR WITH THE SUBMISSION OF THE AR ON BASIS OF FACTS OF THE CASE ON RECORD. THE FACT S OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 6 1. A PARTNERSHIP FIRM WAS FOUND BY AN INSTRUMENT OF PARTNERSHIP ON 16/02/1987 BETWEEN SHRI IQBAAL SINGH, SHRI RAM PRAKASH & SMT. CHANDAN DEVI WHEREIN SHRI IQBAAL SINGH GAMBHIR AND SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR CONTRIBUTED THE PLOT OF LAND NO. 18, SITUATED AT VA NASTHALI MARG, JAIPUR TO THE FIRM AS CAPITAL INVESTMENT. IT WAS MENTIONED IN THE DEED THAT A HOTEL WOULD BE CONSTRUC TED ON THIS LAND BY THE NAME OF HOTEL KOHINOOR. 2. SUBSEQUENTLY A DEED OF RETIREMENT WAS SIGNED ON 31/03/1993 WHERE BY SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR AND SMT. CHANDAN DEVI AGREED TO RETIRE FROM THE PARTNER SHIP BUSINESS WITH EFFECT FROM 01/04/1993. IT WAS MENTIONE D IN THIS DEED OF RETIREMENT THAT ALL THE ASSETS AND LIABILITY OF THE FIRM INCLUDING THE FIXED ASSETS WERE TAKEN BY SHRI IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR WHO HENCEFORTH WOULD RUN THE BUSINESS IN THE NAME OF M/S HOTEL KOHINOOR AT VANAS THALI MARG, JAIPUR, AS A SOLE PROPRIETOR. 3. SHRI IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR FILED HIS RETURN FOR A. Y. 1995-96 AS PROPRIETOR OF HOTEL KOHINOOR VANASHTALI MARG. (C OPY OF THE RETURN FILED) IN A.Y. 1997-98 HIS CASE WAS ASSES SED U/S 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT HE WAS RUNNING A HOTEL BY THE NAME OF KOHINOOR AT VANASTHALI MARG, JAIPUR AS A PROPRIETAR Y CONCERN. ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 7 4. SIMILARLY SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR WAS FILING HIS RETURN AS PROPRIETOR OF HOTEL SHALIMAR (COPY OF RETURNS FO R A.Y. 2001-02 FILED) AND HE HAS NO WHERE SHOWN THE PROPERT Y OF KOHINOOR HOTEL AT VANASTHALI MARG IN HIS BALANCE SHEET. 5. THE CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE WHEN THE ASSESSEE SHRI I QBAAL SINGH GAMBHIR SIGNED A PARTNERSHIP DEED ON 01/04/20 03 WHICH SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR, SHRI ASHISH GAMBHIR AND RAVI GAMBHIR TO CONSTITUTE A NEW PARTNERSHIP FIR M WHEREIN HE INTRODUCED AS HIS CAPITAL THE BUSINESS OF M/S HOTEL KOHINOOR AS A GOING CONCERN WITH ALL ITS ASSET S, ALONG WITH THE LIABILITIES AT BOOK VALUE TO THE NEW F IRM AT AN AGREED VALUE OF RS.2,50,00,000/-. GIVEN THESE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD IT IS NOT VA LID TO HAVE HELD SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE THE CO-OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TRANSFER RED DURING THIS YEAR TO A NEW PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE PROPE RTY HAD DEVOLVED IN HIS INDIVIDUAL HANDS BY THE DEED OF RETIREMENT DATED 31/03/1993 AND CONTINUED TO BE SO TILL IT WAS INTRODUCED AS CAPITAL IN THE NEWLY CONSTITUTED PARTNERSHIP FIRM ON 01/04/2003. THEREFORE, THE ADDIT ION MADE OF RS.6,50,046/- MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT BY DISALLOWING 50% OF THE INDEXED COST OF ACQUISITION IS DELETED. 4. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEALS BEFORE US. THE LD D R HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER. AT THE OUTSET, ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 8 THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT SHRI R AM PRAKASH GAMBHIR PURCHASED 5000 SHARED @ RS.10/- PER SHARE ON 07/7/20 04 AND 1.50 LACS SHARES ON 03/03/2005 @ RS. 50/- PER SHARE, WHICH INCL UDES RS. 40/- PREMIUM PER SHARE. THE ASSESSEE PAID RS. 75 LACS AS COST OF THESE SHARES THROUGH CHEQUES, WHICH ARE VERIFIABLE FROM THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE ENTERED THIS TRANSACTION UNDER THE TWO ACCOUNTS (I) CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND (II) IN PRE MIUM ACCOUNT. AT THE TIME OF COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAIN ON THESE SHARES , THE PREMIUM PAID BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AGAINST THE CO ST OF ACQUISITION AND THERE WAS A TOTALING ERROR OF RS. 3.00 LACS ALSO. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL THE EVIDENCES DURING THE COURSE OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID PREMIUM AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE OF THESE SHARES. TH E LD CIT(A) HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL AFTER VERIFICATION OF PAYMENTS FR OM THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS WELL AS BANK ACCOUNTS. IN THE CASE OF IQB AL SINGH GAMBHIR, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR MISTAKE HAS BEEN COMMITTE D BY THE ACCOUNTANT WHILE CALCULATING THE CAPITAL GAIN, WHICH HAS BEEN EX PLAINED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH EVIDENCE DURING THE ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS, WHICH HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY THE LD CIT(A) AND ALLOWED T HE APPEAL ON THAT BASIS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO PURCHASED 5000 SHARES OF M/ S BMG REAL ESTATE ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 9 ON 07/1/2004 @ 10/- PER SHARE, THEREAFTER 400000 SHA RES ON 19/07/2004 @ RS. 100/- PER SHARE, WHICH INCLUDES RS. 90/- PER SH ARE PREMIUM. THUS, THE ASSESSEE PAID RS. 40 LACS. THESE SHARES SOLD TO KARWASNA DEVELOPERS LTD. @ RS. 400/- PER SHARE AND RECEIVED RS. 1.80 CRO RES AS SALE CONSIDERATION AND ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE CREDIT ED 36.00 LACS IN SHARE PREMIUM ACCOUNT AND BALANCE 1.44 CRORES IN SHARE CA PITAL ACCOUNT SHOWING PROFIT OF RS. 1,39,50,000/-. THESE FACTS HAV E BEEN VERIFIED BY THE LD CIT(A) AT THE TIME OF ALLOWING THE APPEAL. ON THE BASIS OF ALL EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEF ORE THE LD CIT(A). SIMILAR PURCHASE OF 25000 SHARES WERE MADE BY RAM PR AKASH GAMBHIR, BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ITSELF WHERE PREM IUM AMOUNT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED FOR COST OF ACQUISITION. 4.1 HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE AND HIS BROTHER RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR ON 21/7/1985 HAD PURCHASED A PLOT N O. 18, VANASTHALI MARG, SANSAR CHANDRA ROAD, JAIPUR MEASURING TO 444. 44 SQ. YARDS EACH HAVING 50% SHARE THEREIN. THE ASSESSEE AND RAM PRAK ASH GAMBHIR ALONGWITH THEIR MOTHER SMT. CHANDAN DEVI FORMED A PA RTNERSHIP W.E.F. 16/2/1987 UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF HOTEL KOHINOO R WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR CONTRIBUTED T HE SAID PLOT AS THEIR ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 10 CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION IN PARTNERSHIP AND CARRIED ON BUSINESS OF RUNNING THE HOTEL AFTER CONSTRUCTING A HOTEL ON SAID PLOT. THE S AID PARTNERSHIP CAME TO END VIDE DEED OF RETIREMENT DATED 31/3/1993. THER EAFTER ALL THE PARTNERS SETTLED THEIR ACCOUNT AND PLOT INCLUDING H OTEL BUILDING WAS TAKEN BY SHRI IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR. HE DID THE HOTEL BUSIN ESS AS PROPRIETOR TILL 31/3/2003 AND DECLARED HOTEL INCOME FROM A.Y. 1993- 94 TO 2003-04, WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDING LY, HE WAS 100% OWNER OF THE PLOT AS WELL AS HOTEL BUILDING. THE ASSES SEE W.E.F. 01/4/2003 AGAIN FORMED PARTNERSHIP FOR SAID HOTEL KOHINOOR AN D ON RECONSTITUTION OF SAID PARTNERSHIP W.E.F. 18/5/2005, HE CONTRIBUTED TH E SAID ENTIRE PLOT OF LAND MEASURING 444.44 SQ. YARDS ALONGWITH THREE ADJA CENT PLOTS MEASURING EACH 106.93 SQ. YARDS PURCHASED IN 1995 B Y THE ASSESSEE AS CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION IN THE SAID PARTNERSHIP VALUED OF RS. 2.50 CRORES RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF PARTNERSHIP BY CREATING HIS CAPITAL ACCOUNT. THIS TRANSACTION WAS LIABLE TO CAPITAL GAIN U/S 45(3) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE DECLARED CAPITAL GAIN IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2006- 07. THE ASSESSEE CONTRIBUTED ITS CAPITAL ENTIRE PLOT OF LAND IN PARTNERSHIP AND VALUE RECORDED, THEREFORE, HAS BEEN ACCEPTED FO R COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAIN AND SO COST OF ENTIRE PLOT IS DEDUCTIB LE. THE OWNERSHIP AND POSSESSION OF ASSESSEE ON ENTIRE PLOT OF LAND OF 44 4.44 SQ. YARDS IS ALSO ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 11 FULLY PROVED AND EVIDENCED. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TAKEN 50% SHARE APPROPRIATELY WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE WAS OWNER OF THE HOTEL KOHINOOR AS PROPRIETOR ALONGWITH PLOTS TRANSFERRED F OR CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION W.E.F. 18/5/2005. FURTHER HE REITERATED THE ARGUMENT S MADE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) AND ARGUED THAT THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER HAD WRONGLY NOT ALLOWED THE FULL COST OF ACQUISITION WHILE COMPUTING THE CA PITAL GAIN. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,50,046/ -. THEREFORE, HE PRAYED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. DUE T O MISTAKE OF ACCOUNTANT, THE PREMIUM AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN CLAIMED IN COST OF ACQUISITION WHILE COMPUTING THE CAPITAL GAIN, WHICH H AS BEEN VERIFIED BY THE LD CIT(A) WHILE DECIDING THE APPEALS OF BOTH THE ASSESSEES. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE PREMIUM AMOUNT I N THE CASE OF M/S BMG REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD. IN THE CASE OF RAM PRAKAS H GAMBHIR WHEREAS NOT ACCEPTED THIS SHARE PREMIUM IN THE CASE OF IQBA L SINGH GAMBHIR. THEREFORE, ADDITION HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE LD CIT(A) FOR COST OF ACQUISITION OF SHARE PREMIUM IN THE CASE OF M/S BMG REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.. THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 45(3) OF THE ACT, THE LD AS SESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF COST OF ACQUISITION @ 50% NOT 100% IN THE CASE OF TRANSFER OF ITA 881 & 880/JP/2012_ DCIT VS. RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR 12 HOTEL PLOT TO PARTNERSHIP CONCERNED. THESE FACTS ALS O HAVE BEEN SEQUENTIALLY CONSIDERED BY THE LD CIT(A) AND HELD TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS 100% OWNER OF THE HOTEL AT THE TIME OF FORMING PARTN ERSHIP AS ON 18/5/2005. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO IN TERVENE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A), ACCORDINGLY, UPHOLD THE ORDE RS OF THE LD CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULTS, BOTH OF THE REVENUES APPEALS AR E DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/05/2016. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ VH-VKJ-EHUK (LALIET KUMAR) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 27 TH MAY, 2016 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI RAM PRAKASH GAMBHIR/SHRI IQBAL SINGH GAMBHIR, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 881 & 880/JP/2012) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR