9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1648 - AT - Income TaxCapital gain computation - Addition by accepting the value as recommended by the DVO - DVO valued at different price of adjacent piece of land - HELD THAT - Provision of section 50C are not applicable as in the present case, agreement was executed on 15.1.2001, while section 50C was introduced by Finance Act, 2002 applicable from 1.4.2003. Secondly, the valuation adopted by the DVO is not correct as the DVO has adopted different value for the same piece of land. As per the DVO, for one piece of land, it is adopted @ ₹ 591/- per. Sq.ft. and in the case of other buyer, it is ₹ 451/- per sq.ft. The rival submissions and material placed on record. Two different values have been taken by the DVO considering the contemporary cases, the value so adopted is excessive. DVO has not given reason to adopt values of the adjacent piece of land. We therefore, direct the A.O. to adopt the value @ ₹ 451/- per sq.ft. as adopted by the DVO for one part of the land and compute the addition accordingly. This ground of the assessee s appeal is partly allowed.
Issues involved:
1. Valuation of property by the Departmental Valuation Officer 2. Applicability of section 50C of the Income Tax Act 3. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal Valuation of property by the Departmental Valuation Officer: The appeal was against the order of the CIT(A)-II, Indore regarding the assessment year 2006-07. The assessee objected to the valuation of the property by the AVO and referred the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer. The A.O. adopted the valuation given by the DVO, resulting in an addition to the income of the assessee. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, leading the assessee to appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT considered the medical report submitted by the assessee, who was suffering from cancer, and condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The main ground of appeal was against the addition made by the assessing officer based on the DVO's valuation. The ITAT found merit in the contention that the DVO had adopted different values for the same piece of land without proper justification. Therefore, the ITAT directed the A.O. to adopt a specific value per sq.ft. as recommended by the DVO for one part of the land, partially allowing this ground of the appeal. Applicability of section 50C of the Income Tax Act: The assessee contended that section 50C of the Act was not applicable to the transaction dated 15.1.2001, as the agreement was executed before the provision came into force. However, the ITAT rejected this contention, stating that the sale deed was executed after the provision came into effect. Therefore, the ITAT dismissed this objection of the assessee, affirming the applicability of section 50C of the Income Tax Act to the transaction. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal: The appeal was delayed by 67 days, and the assessee filed an application seeking condonation of the delay due to the serious illness of stage 3 cancer. The ITAT considered the medical report and affidavit submitted by the assessee, confirming the illness and treatment. The ITAT accepted the reason stated as a sufficient cause for the delay and thus condoned the delay, allowing the appeal for adjudication. This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues of valuation of property by the Departmental Valuation Officer, the applicability of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, and the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal aspects involved in the case.
|
