9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 57 - AT - Income TaxCalculation of indexed cost of property - CIT(A) enhanced the rate of land to ₹ 17/- wherein, the AO adopted fair value of ₹ 11/- per sq. mtr for undeveloped big area for the year 1981 - whether land transferred by the assessee as agricultural land and not coming within the provisions of sec 2(24)(iii)(a) or 2(14)(iii)(b) of the income Tax Act, 1961 and as such not liable for Capital Gains Tax? - Held that - In cross objection the assessee has taken the additional ground that the assessee has sold the agricultural land property, thus assessee has taken a legal issue in the cross objection for the first time before us. Therefore, as per decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tollaram Hassomal reported in ( 2006 (3) TMI 136 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court) the matter is remitted to the file of the AO for verification of the same. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. AO directed to work the fair market value as on 1-4-1981 at ₹ 25/- per.sq.mtr. - Held that - he Fair Market Value in relation to a capital asset means the price that capital asset would ordinarily fetch on sale in the open market on the relevant date. It is also a fact that there is no rule prescribed for the determination of the Fair Market Value. In this regard, under these facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, it will be fair and reasonable to adopt the Fair Market Value as has been worked out by the Inspector of the Department. Trinal corectly directed AO to o work out the Fair Market Value as on 1.4.1981 at ₹ 25/- per sq. mtr. - Decided against revenue.
Issues involved:
1. Dispute over the fair market value of undeveloped land for capital gains tax calculation. 2. Classification of the transferred land as agricultural or non-agricultural for tax purposes. 3. Verification of documentary evidence submitted by the assessee for the first time during the appeal process. 4. Applicability of legal precedent regarding raising new legal issues during the appeal. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Dispute over fair market value The department raised concerns about the fair market value adopted by the Assessing Officer (AO) for calculating capital gains tax on undeveloped land. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (CIT(A)) had increased the rate to Rs. 17 per sq. mtr, while the AO had used Rs. 11 per sq. mtr based on a report from the Sub-Registrar. The department argued that the AO's rate was reasonable, considering the information obtained. However, the CIT(A) relied on a report from an income-tax inspector suggesting a higher value. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the department's appeals and allowed the cross objections, directing the fair market value to be set at Rs. 25 per sq. mtr. Issue 2: Classification of transferred land The assessee contended that the transferred land should be considered agricultural and not subject to capital gains tax. The AO had classified the land as non-agricultural without proper evaluation. The Tribunal noted discrepancies in the valuation report submitted by the approved valuer and emphasized the importance of comparative instances relevant to the locality, time, and nature of the land. The Tribunal directed the AO to determine the fair market value at Rs. 25 per sq. mtr, considering the evidence provided by the inspector. Issue 3: Verification of documentary evidence During the appeal process, the assessee submitted documentary evidence, including a recent censor certificate and distance details, for the first time. The department objected, citing lack of opportunity for verification by the AO. The Tribunal, following legal precedent, remitted the matter to the AO for verification, emphasizing the need to ascertain all facts from the concerned authority and provide the assessee with a fair hearing. Issue 4: Applicability of legal precedent The Tribunal referred to a decision by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court regarding raising new legal issues during the appeal process. Considering that the assessee presented legal issues for the first time, the Tribunal remitted the matter to the AO for verification and decision, following the principles outlined in the legal precedent. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the department's appeals, allowed the cross objections, and directed the AO to determine the fair market value of the land at Rs. 25 per sq. mtr. The decision highlighted the importance of accurate valuation and proper classification of land for tax purposes, emphasizing the need for relevant and verifiable evidence in tax assessments.
|
