2015 (8) TMI 454 - AT - Income Tax

Addition made by following the valuation method u/s.50C - Assessing Officer applying Section 50C adopted the full value of consideration of assessee s 1/18thshare as ₹ 24,91,704/- and worked out the long term capital gain at ₹ 9,89,396/- as against loss of ₹ 1,83,713/- worked out by assesse - Held that - In view of the provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act, we are of the considered view that the AO was not justified in adopting the value of the property as adopted by the stamp valuation authority without referring to the DVO for ascertaining the fair market value of the property. Therefore, the orders of the authorities below on this issue are hereby set aside and the additional ground raised by the assessee is restored back to the file of AO to decide the same in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Consideration of revised return filed prior to the receipt of assessment order.
2. Admission of revised return as an additional ground under rule 46A.
3. Consideration of affidavit contents.
4. Valuation report submission for property valuation.
5. Recomputation of Long Term Capital Gain as per the revised return.
6. Deduction of Section 50EC for the invested amount.
7. Application of Section 50C for valuation of property.
8. Referral to District Valuation Officer for fair market value determination.
9. Compliance with Section 50C(2) provisions.
10. Setting aside orders of lower authorities based on valuation discrepancies.
11. Restoration of the matter to the Assessing Officer for proper assessment.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The first issue pertains to the appellant's contention regarding the non-consideration of the revised return filed before the assessment order's receipt. The appellant argued that this oversight affected the assessment process.

2. The second issue involves the appellant's plea for the admission of the revised return as an additional ground under rule 46A. The appellant claimed that this ground was crucial for a fair assessment.

3. The third issue revolves around the appellant's assertion regarding the contents of an affidavit filed, which they believed should have been taken into account during the assessment.

4. The fourth issue relates to the appellant's submission of a valuation report for the property in question, emphasizing the importance of considering this report for accurate valuation.

5. The fifth issue concerns the appellant's request for the recomputation of Long Term Capital Gain in alignment with the revised return, highlighting discrepancies in the initial assessment.

6. The sixth issue involves the appellant's plea for the deduction of Section 50EC concerning a specific investment amount, which they believed should have been factored into the assessment.

7. The seventh issue delves into the application of Section 50C for the valuation of the property, specifically focusing on the methodology used to determine the full value of consideration received.

8. The eighth issue pertains to the appellant's request for a referral to the District Valuation Officer to ascertain the fair market value of the property, emphasizing the need for an accurate valuation process.

9. The ninth issue addresses the compliance with Section 50C(2) provisions, highlighting the procedural requirements for determining the fair market value of the property.

10. The tenth issue involves the setting aside of lower authorities' orders based on valuation discrepancies and the subsequent restoration of the matter to the Assessing Officer for proper assessment.

11. The final issue encompasses the overall decision to allow the appeals filed by the assesses for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of fair and accurate assessments in tax matters.