9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actually received one paise more than the amount shown to have been received by him.In favour of assessee. - ITAT No. 62 of 2013, GA No. 684 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 14-5-2013 - Girish Chandra Gupta and Tarun Kumar Das, JJ For the Appellant : Md. Nizumuddin, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Alok Kumar Pal, Adv. JUDGEMENT:- The Court : The assessee sold the property at a sum of Rs.2,51,50,000/- For the purpose of stamp duty, however, the value was estimated at a sum of Rs.5,19,77,000/- and on that basis the stamp duty was realized. During the assessment, it was found that the assessee had disclosed the sale price at a sum of Rs.2,51,50,000/-. The Assessing Officer fixed the sale price at a sum of Rs.5,19,77,000/- and started ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 is concerned, even if the valuation of property as per the stamp valuation authority is more than the actual sale consideration, the provisions of section 50C(2) allow the appellant to choose the actual sale consideration if the appellant is convinced about the fair market value of such property being the same as consideration actually received by the appellant. Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 50C(1) and deemed the sale consideration at Rs.5,19,77,000/- as per the valuation of stamp valuation authorities and appellant chose not to contest the same u/s. 50C(2) of the I.T. Act as it would not have made any difference in the tax liability of the appellant because the capital gain still remained a loss. However, the belief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the fact that the revenue has not been able to dislodge the findings of the ld. CIT(A) that the bona fides of the assessee are genuine, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) stand confirmed. In the circumstances, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 4. Mr. Niaumuddin, learned Advocate appearing for the Revenue, contended that the assessee had a choice to dispute the valuation on the basis of the deemed value, but the assessee did not take that opportunity. The assessee had a choice or he could have litigated. The fact remains that the actual amount received was offered for taxation. It is only on the basis of the deemed consideration that the proceedings under Section 271(C) started. The revenue has failed to produce any iota of evidence tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
