9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961, specifically u/s 50-C, 55-A, and 132(1)(iib); consideration of fair market value of assets; admissibility of electronic records seized during search and seizure.
Interpretation of Section 50-C: The Supreme Court directed the Authority to consider the case of the assessee as per the arguments presented regarding the application of Section 50-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court questioned whether the impugned order failed to apply the relevant statutory provisions of the Act, including Section 50-C, and whether the valuation adopted by the stamp valuation authority should be considered as the full value of consideration for computation of capital gains. It was also raised whether the Assessing Officer's acceptance of property valuation stated in Sale Deeds without reference to a valuation officer was legally acceptable. Mandatory Provisions of Section 50-C: The Court examined whether the impugned order of remand failed to address and apply the mandatory provisions of Section 50-C, leading to patent illegality and material irregularity. It was questioned whether the legislative intention behind Section 50-C was to equate the value of land/building assessed by the stamp valuation authority for stamp duty purposes with the value for computing capital gains under Section 48. Role of Assessing Officer and Valuation Officer: The judgment considered whether the Assessing Officer should have sought guidance solely from the value assessed by the stamp valuation authority, especially when the registering authority had not followed the proper stamp duty procedures. Additionally, the Court deliberated on whether Section 55-A empowered the assessing authority to refer to a Valuation Officer for determining the fair market value of the asset based on various circumstances and evidence. Admissibility of Electronic Records: The Court analyzed whether the provisions of Section 132(1)(iib) required a threshold determination of the admissibility and legitimacy of electronic data seized from a computer, in accordance with the Evidence Act and Information Technology Act, before raising presumptions or using such data against the assessee. The special leave petitions were disposed of accordingly by the Supreme Court.
|
