9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt cannot be taken as AO has no authority to refer the valuation under section 55A. However, the land has been valued by the DVO which has power and skill to determine such value. If the evidence is available on record then it will be inappropriate to compute capital gain without taking cognizance of that evidence just for the reason that the same is going against the revenue. It has already been pointed out that it is the evidence collected by the revenue and when the valuation has been disputed by the assessee, such authenticated evidence cannot be ignored simply for the reason that AO does not have power u/s 55A to refer the same to the DVO. Therefore, matter for both the years should be restored back to the file of AO with a direction t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (7,12,00,134 - 19,33,500/-) on notional basis. 4. Without prejudice to above the learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing officer to accept the valuation report of valuation officer, according to which share of the assessee was Rs.15,39,869/- hence addition may be directed to be deleted. 5. Without prejudice to above the learned CIT(A) erred in contradicting himself by one-side confirming the addition of long term capital gains by considering sale value on estimate basis and on the other-side disregarding the valuation report by the DVO, on the ground that section 50C is not applicable and hence the reference made to DVO was bad in law. Hence the order may be quashed and the additions may be deleted. 6. The Ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on 01-04-1981 which is contrary to law hence the A.O. may be directed to adopt valuation as on 1/4/198 1 adopted by the valuation officer. 2. At the outset it may be mentioned here that Ground No.1 for both the assessment years, which relates to validity of re-assessment proceedings were not pressed by Ld. AR, hence, they are dismissed being not pressed. 3. The facts relevant for both the years are as under: A.Y.2007-08: 3.1 The assessee declared long term capital gain in respect of three plots of land at Rs.19,33,500/-. The details of which are as under: (i) LTCG on sale of Property at Survey No.47 Hissa No.6, CTS 794 at Village Kandivili Rs.1,40,500/- (ii) LTCG on sale of Property at Survey No.224, His ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act at Rs.7,14,32,650/-, which is subject to rectification/revision on receipt of Valuation report of the District Valuation Officer, Mumbai 3.2 Similarly for A.Y 2009-10 the assessee has declared short term capital gain of Rs. 12,50,000/- as under: (i) S.T.C.G on sale of Property at Survey No.244, Hissa No.13, CTS 2516 at Village Malvani (Area 10 Gunthas) Rs.12,50,000/- Total Short term capital gain declared by assessee Rs.12,50,000/- The AO adopting the ready reckoner rate has considered the sale consideration at Rs.2,03,96,880/- and after giving the set off of acquisition has computed the capital gain at Rs.51,98,440/- being one half of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... report from the DVO. Ld. AR submitted that the calculation of capital gain by the AO cannot in any manner be sustained as there is a little difference in the capital gain computed by the assessee and capital gain calculated on the basis of value determined by DVO. To support such contention he has furnished a chart before us in respect of both assessment years which is annexed to this order as Annexure- 1 2. Ld. AR also submitted that assessee has filed rectification application before AO as according to assessment order the computation of capital gain was subject to rectification and revision. He submitted that it will serve the interest of justice if the matter for both the years is restored back to the file of AO with a direction to re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal gain has taken the value described as per ready reckoner. However, the land has been valued by the DVO which has power and skill to determine such value. If the evidence is available on record then it will be inappropriate to compute capital gain without taking cognizance of that evidence just for the reason that the same is going against the revenue. It has already been pointed out that it is the evidence collected by the revenue and when the valuation has been disputed by the assessee, such authenticated evidence cannot be ignored simply for the reason that AO does not have power under section 55A to refer the same to the DVO. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that the matter for both the years should be res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
