2014 (2) TMI 435 - AT - Income Tax

Deletion made on account of LTCG Valuation of capital asset Held that - The conditions prescribed in section 55A of the Act have not been complied with by the AO, the DVO s report cannot be considered Relying uponCommissioner of Income-tax Versus Umedbhai International P. Ltd. 2010 (2) TMI 631 - Calcutta High Court - the formation of opinion of the Assessing Officer that the value claimed by the assessee less than its fair market value is sine qua non - Reasons recorded after order of reference for valuation of the registered valuer is not the substitute of pre-decisional formation of opinion thus, there is no applicability of clause (b) of section 55A which is meant for other purpose - Decided against Revenue. Expenses on income from other sources 50% allowed Held that - The AO has brought out adequate reasons for disallowing of said expenditure The AO has allowed the expenditure on an adhoc basis and has not met out the issues raised by the AO - The assessee has not shown what is the nature of the accounting charges nor the expenditure A/c nor the retaining fees - In the absence of any evidence in respect of the nature of the expenditure, the same cannot be allowed - the deletion of disallowance to the extent of @50% by the CIT(A) is erroneous and liable to be reversed Decided in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal filed by revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for assessment year 2006-07.
- Dispute over the deletion of addition on account of Long Term Capital Gains.
- Disagreement on the Fair Market Value (FMV) calculation as on 1st April, 1981.
- Disallowance of expenses on account of income from other sources.

Analysis:
1. Long Term Capital Gains Addition Dispute:
- The revenue appealed against the deletion of the addition of Rs.45,48,315 on account of Long Term Capital Gains. The revenue contended that the computation of capital gains by the Assessing Officer (AO) should be upheld. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ruled in favor of the assessee, leading to the dismissal of this ground in both appeals.

2. Fair Market Value Calculation Disagreement:
- The revenue disputed the adoption of FMV at Rs.19,07,733 as 25% share of the assessee as on 1st April, 1981. They argued that the FMV was inflated by the assessee to reduce capital gains. The AO's reliance on a Registered Valuer's report was questioned. The AO did not comply with the conditions of Section 55A of the Income Tax Act, rendering the DVO's report inadmissible. Citing a High Court decision, the CIT(A)'s findings were upheld, leading to the dismissal of this ground in both appeals.

3. Expenses Disallowance on Income from Other Sources:
- The AO disallowed expenses claimed against income from other sources, stating they were not exclusively for earning such income. The CIT(A) allowed 50% of the expenses on an adhoc basis without detailed verification. The Tribunal found that the nature of the expenses was not adequately demonstrated by the assessee. Consequently, the deletion of disallowance to the extent of 50% by the CIT(A) was deemed erroneous and reversed. This ground was allowed in both appeals.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the deletion of the addition on Long Term Capital Gains, dismissed the FMV calculation disputes in favor of the assessee, and reversed the allowance of expenses on income from other sources. The revenue's appeals were partly allowed for the assessment year 2006-07.