2020 (9) TMI 367 - AT - Income Tax

Capital gain computation - market value of the property sold u/s. 50C - HELD THAT - We have no reason to disbelieve the genuineness of the contents of the agreement.The issue of registration was resolved by an order of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 13-2-2007. From the agreement, we observe that the payment was received by the assessee by cheque for transfer of land, therefore, the case is squarely covered by the proviso to section 50C of the Act. On identical facts, this Tribunal in the case of Smt. Chalasani Naga Ratna Kumari, Visakhapatnam 2016 (12) TMI 1406 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM directed the AO to adopt the value of the property as on the date of execution of the agreement for capital gains We direct the AO to adopt the value of the property for the purpose of section 50C of the Act for computing capital gains as on the date of execution of agreement to sale, but not as on the date of sale deed. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and remit the matter back to the file of the AO for limited purpose of verification of SRO value as on the date of sale agreement for determination of the capital gains. The AO is required to give opportunity to the assessee before passing the order. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against CIT (A)'s order on addition under section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2007-08.

Analysis:
1. The AO added the difference between the sale consideration and SRO value of a property to the assessee's income under section 50C. The assessee argued that the property's value for capital gains should be based on the sale agreement date, not the sale deed date. Both CIT (A) and AO rejected this argument.

2. The assessee presented an unregistered sale agreement from 2003, showing advance payments received. Due to a dispute, the property couldn't be registered until 2007, resolved by a High Court order. The Tribunal noted the agreement's genuineness and the payments made by cheque, supporting the assessee's case. The Tribunal referred to a similar case where the value as per the agreement date was considered for capital gains under section 50C.

3. The Tribunal found that the AO erred in not considering the agreement's contents and the proviso to section 50C, which allows using the agreement date for valuation. The Tribunal directed the AO to determine capital gains based on the agreement date, setting aside the CIT (A)'s order. The AO was instructed to verify the SRO value on the agreement date and provide the assessee with an opportunity before finalizing the assessment.

4. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of considering the agreement date for valuation under section 50C.