9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 708X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in issuing the notice u/s 148 of the Act and reopening the case. 2. That notwithstanding ground of appeal in Sl.No.1 above, it is submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO in assessing long term capital gain at Rs.11,00,125/-. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred to consider that the AO has erred in taking fair market value of property on the basis of stamp duty valuation ignoring the fact that stamp duty valuation would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration in the absence of any positive evidence and the CIT(A) has failed to consider the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court as cited before him as reported in 323 ITR 510 and, in fact, the written submissions as filed before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal return of income in which no income from capital gain was disclosed. The Assessing Officer noticed the assessee not to have disclosed income arising on sale of industrial plot in Ludhiana, though the sale deed was executed on 3.3.2006. The proceedings were reopened under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act. Though the assessee has raised ground No.1 against invoking of provisions of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, but the same has not been pressed by the learned A.R. for the assessee. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee claims to have sold his share in the property No.630, Industrial Area-B, Ludhiana for a total consideration of Rs.9 lacs vide sale deed dated 3.3.2006. The State Revenue Authority had valued the mark ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. 7. The learned A.R. for the assessee pointed out that the additional evidence furnished before the CIT(A) was referred to the Assessing Officer who in turn filed his remand report and accepted the contention of the assessee. However, the CIT(A) has failed to rebut the same. 8. The learned D.R. for the Revenue pointed out that fresh/additional evidence was furnished before the CIT(A). 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The assessee during the year under consideration had claimed to have sold his share in property No.630-B, Industrial Area-B, Ludhiana vide sale deed dated 3.3.2006 for total consideration of Rs.9 lacs. The Stamp Valuation Authorities while registering the said property determined the market v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... furnished the copy of the said letter addressed to the CIT(A) at pages 5 to 7 of the Paper Book alongwith the allotment letter, copy of registered titled deed, copy of will of Shri Ganga Singh, grand father of the assessee and report of Registered Valuer at pages 8 to 26 of the Paper Book. The English version of the said documents are also filed on record. The CIT(A) had forwarded the above said documents to the Assessing Officer who had commented upon the facts as stated by the assessee to be correct. Further reference was made to the sale deed registered on 13.3.2006 under which stamp duty of Rs.1,80,000/- was paid on Rs.20 lacs. Reference was made to the construction of the said plot being made before 24.10.1977. The Assessing Officer p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also for the same being considered by the CIT(A), after the same is confronted to the Assessing Officer. The powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with the powers of the Assessing Officer and while deciding the issue, the CIT(A) is empowered to base its decision on any of the said additional evidence being furnished by the assessee, in order to adjudicate the issue raised before him. In the facts of the present case before us, we find the assessee had initially in the computation of income filed before the Assessing Officer declared the cost of acquisition of the asset sole at its cost price paid in 1955 and the cost of construction incurred in 1977. However, under the provisions of section 48 of the Income Tax Act, while computing the incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT(A) wherein the assessee had filed the evidence in respect of allotment of the said plot in the name of the grand father of the assessee in the year 1955. The registered title deed in favour of his grand father was executed in 1981. Further, the copy of the will of the grand father has also been filed on record alongwith English version of the abovesaid documents. Admittedly, in all such cases where the property/asset is acquired prior to 1.4.1981, fair market value on 1.4.1981 is to be adopted and we hold so. Now the question before us is the determination of fair market value as on 1.4.1981. The assessee has filed report of Registered Valuer but the same has not been looked into by the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). In the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
