9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 1021 - HC - Income TaxApplicability of section 55A - Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Section 55A would apply only to computation of income under the head Capital Gains Held that - Following the decision in as the similar matter has been decided in Smt. Amiya Bala Paul v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 2003 (7) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court wherein it has been held that besides S.55A having expressly set out the circumstances under and the purposes for which a reference could be made to a Valuation Officer, there is no question of the AO invoking the general powers of enquiry to make a reference in different circumstances and for other purposes thus, the provisions of Section 55A would apply only to computation of income under the head Capital Gains Decided against revenue.
Issues:
Appeal against judgment and order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Assessment of total income under the head of capital gains - Application of Section 55A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: Issue 1: Appeal against Tribunal's Order The appeal was filed against the judgment and order dated 28.01.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, where both the appeal by the Revenue and the Cross Objection by the assessee were dismissed. The respondent-assessee, engaged in the hotel business, sold the hotel building along with furniture and fixtures during the relevant year. The total income under the head of capital gains was assessed at Rs. 64,72,825/- by the Assessing Officer, leading to appeals and cross-objections. The Tribunal ultimately dismissed both appeals, prompting the Revenue to file this appeal. Issue 2: Application of Section 55A The substantial question of law in this appeal was whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the provisions of Section 55A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 applied only to the computation of income under the head of Capital Gains. The court referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Smt. Amiya Bala Paul v. Commissioner of Income Tax, [2003] 262 ITR 407 (SC), which provided detailed observations on the application of Section 55A. The court noted that the power to refer any dispute to a Valuation Officer under Section 55A was distinct from other general powers of inquiry available to the Assessing Officer under different sections. The court emphasized that Section 55A explicitly outlined the circumstances and purposes for making a reference to a Valuation Officer, indicating a specific intent behind its introduction in the Act. Judgment The court, after considering the precedent set by the Apex Court, found in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue regarding the application of Section 55A. The court highlighted that the reasoning of the Tribunal was well-founded and aligned with the legal principles established by the Apex Court. As a result, the court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision on the application of Section 55A. The judgment upheld the interpretation that Section 55A pertains specifically to the computation of income under the head of Capital Gains, as per the established legal framework.
|
