2014 (8) TMI 683 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Guidance value for stamp duty - Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Government Circular prescribing the guidance value for stamp duty cannot be placed reliance by the AO to reopen the assessments u/s 147 r.w. section 148 Held that - The assessment was reopened by the AO and he ultimately called upon the assessee to pay tax on the difference of the acquisition value of the property and the price received by him on sale of the property in the year 1999-2000 - The Tribunal did not go into the merits of the case and allowed the appeal solely on the ground that the AO was wrong in reopening the assessment after 16 years on the basis of the Circular dated November 10, 1982 - the view taken by the Tribunal was wrong - Though the Circular was issued 16 years ago, it was showing the guidance value prevailing at the relevant time - the Tribunal ought to have recorded its finding on the merits also - the assessee did not and could not produce on record any authentic material to show the purchase price of the property in the year 1981 or, when he actually purchased the property- Tribunal ought to have considered the case on the merits also to find out whether the valuer s report was authentic and acceptable Decided in favour of Revenue.

Issues:
1. Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act based on guidance value.
2. Justifiability of relying on Government Circular for reassessment.
3. Merits of the case in considering the valuation of property.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act based on the guidance value of the property. The respondent-assessee had filed a return under section 139 of the Act, which was accepted under section 143(1). However, the assessment was later reopened solely on the ground that the cost of acquisition shown by the assessee was much higher than the guidance value prescribed by a Government Circular. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders passed by the authorities below.

2. The main issue raised was whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Government Circular prescribing the guidance value for stamp duty cannot be relied upon by the Assessing Officer to reopen assessments under section 147 of the Act. The High Court found the Tribunal's view to be incorrect. Despite the Circular being issued 16 years prior, it reflected the prevailing guidance value at the relevant time. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have considered the case on its merits, especially regarding the authenticity and acceptability of the valuer's report provided by the assessee.

3. The High Court noted that the assessee failed to produce authentic material to support the purchase price of the property in question. The value of the land and construction costs declared by the assessee significantly differed from the guidance value specified in the Circular. The Court opined that the Tribunal should have delved into the merits of the case to ascertain the validity of the valuer's report and the actual purchase details. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, directing the Tribunal to hear and decide the case afresh, considering all aspects of the valuation in accordance with the law.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment addressed the issues of reassessment based on guidance value, the justifiability of relying on a Government Circular for reassessment, and the importance of considering the merits of the case in property valuation disputes. The Court emphasized the need for a thorough examination of the valuation details and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the appeal while keeping all contentions open and ensuring notice to the absent assessee.

← Previous Next →