9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (5) TMI 1142 - AT - Income TaxReference to the DVO u/s. 55A - valuation of the registered valuer of the assessee should be accepted and not the valuation given by the DVO - Held that - Assessing Officer has no power to make the reference to the DVO for the A.Y. 2008-09 by invoking u/s. 55A of the Income-tax Act for determining fair market value as on 01-04-1981. Moreover, the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Puja Prints 2014 (1) TMI 764 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT . We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the same is confirm and grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed.
Issues:
1. Valuation dispute based on reference to Valuation Officer u/s. 55A of the Income-tax Act. 2. Interpretation of provisions of s. 55A(a) and s. 55A(b)(ii) of the Act. 3. Validity of reference to DVO for determining fair market value as on 01-04-1981. 4. Applicability of CBDT circular and High Court judgments. Analysis: Issue 1: Valuation dispute based on reference to Valuation Officer u/s. 55A of the Income-tax Act The appeal involved a dispute over the valuation of a property sold by the assessee, with the Revenue challenging the valuation determined by the registered valuer of the assessee against the valuation provided by the DVO. The Assessing Officer had referred the matter to the DVO under section 55A of the Income-tax Act, leading to a difference in the fair market value calculation and the subsequent Long Term Capital Gain assessment. Issue 2: Interpretation of provisions of s. 55A(a) and s. 55A(b)(ii) of the Act The key contention revolved around the interpretation of s. 55A(a) and s. 55A(b)(ii) of the Act. The High Court judgments in the cases of CIT Vs. Puja Prints and Hiaben Jayantilal Shah provided guidance on the conditions under which a reference to the DVO could be made. The court emphasized that under s. 55A(a), a reference to the DVO could only be made if the value declared by the assessee was less than the fair market value, and s. 55A(b)(ii) applied in cases not covered by s. 55A(a). Issue 3: Validity of reference to DVO for determining fair market value as on 01-04-1981 The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer lacked the power to refer the matter to the DVO for determining the fair market value as on 01-04-1981 for the relevant assessment year. The decision was supported by the High Court judgments and the provisions of the Income-tax Act, which outlined the specific conditions under which such references could be made, emphasizing that no claim was made by the assessee before the reference was initiated. Issue 4: Applicability of CBDT circular and High Court judgments The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, citing the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court and the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that the CBDT circular issued by the Revenue was not binding on the assessee, and the law applicable at the time of assessment governed the case. The judgments highlighted the importance of adhering to the statutory provisions and the specific conditions outlined in the Act for making references to the Valuation Officer. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and confirming the valuation determined by the registered valuer. The judgment provided clarity on the interpretation of s. 55A of the Income-tax Act and the conditions under which references to the DVO could be made, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions and judicial precedents.
|
