9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 969X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue is against the order of CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to adopt, the fair market value of the property sold, as determined by DVO instead of value assessed by Stamp Valuation Authority and adopted by Assessing Officer. For this, the revenue has raised only following effective ground: 1. That under the facts circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O. to adopt the value of the property sold as per DVO report for the purpose of computing capital gains in place of value adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority and considered by A.O. as per provisions of Section 50C(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961. 3. The brief facts leading to the above issue are that the assessee is co-owner, to the extent of share, of property at 76, Cotton Street, Kolkata-7 (covered area of 4265 sft. at the ground floor, 3785 sft. at the first floor and 3000 sft. at the second floor containing 8 cottahs 2 chittaks 22 sft. as per sale deed) and the same was sold by the assessee during the year under consideration and disclosed sale consideration in the sale deed for her half share at Rs.20 lacs and computed Long Term Capital Gains (hereinafter referred to as the LTCG ) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty tax of Rs.23,296/- p.a. According to her, this property was loss making proposition and further no buyers were forthcoming to buy a 100 year old property, which is under litigation and tenanted. She contended that the Stamp Duty Authorities valued the property, which is much more than fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer. She stated that sale deed of this property was signed, executed and submitted before the Sub-Registrar on 15.10.2004 and the requisite stamp duty, as per law, was affixed and paid but received the sale consideration as declared at Rs.20 lacs for her half share. Subsequently on 31.12.2006 i.e. more than two years after the sale was completed, the stamp duty was assessed at a very high figure, as per rates prevailing at that time and the assessee was not even a party to that sale, which had been completed long before the assessment of stamp duty. Finally, she stated that this property was assessed for payment of stamp duty on 31.12.2006, whereas it was sold by the assessee on 15.10.2004 and return of income for the Assessment Year 2005-06, i.e. the relevant assessment year, was filed on 28.7.2005. In view of these facts, she stated that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer obtained report from the DVO and submitted through JCIT to CIT(A). The assessee submitted no objection for adoption of value as determined by DVO vide report No. 1876/DVO/ITD/09-10/507 dt 18.11.09.The DVO value the property at Rs.30,87,675/- and the CIT(A) after considering the provisions of section 50C of the Act, directed Assessing Officer as under : The appellant, on the other hand, contended that as per law the A.O. should have referred the matter to DVO as the value adopted by the stamp duty Authority is much more than the FMV of the property as on the date of transfer. My Ld. Predecessor after considering the submissions directed the A.O. to refer the matter to DVO. Accordingly the A.O. got the property valued and send the valuation report. The DVO valued the property at Rs.30,87,675/-. The appellant after going the valuation report has accepted the above said valuation. After considering the facts and provisions of section 50C, I find that my Ld. Predecessor has rightly directed the A.O. to refer the matter to DVO and got the property valued. The A.O. in his remand report while submitting the DVO report has not made any adverse comments. In view of the matter, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt (hereafter in this section referred to as the stamp valuation authority ) for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. (2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), where (a) the assessee claims before any Assessing Officer that the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1) exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer; (b) the value so adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1) has not been disputed in any appeal or revision or no reference has been made before any other authority, court or the High Court, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the capital asset to a Valuation Officer and where any such reference is made, the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of section 16A, clause (i) of sub-section (1) and sub-sections (6) and (7) of section 23A, sub-section (5) of section 24, section 34AA, section 35 and section 37 of the Weal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
