9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nexplained deposits in bank account – Held that:- The extract of accounts that there is opening balance of ₹ 15 lakhs as on 1.4.2008 and cheque for ₹ 20 lakhs was received on 3.4.2008 - The total amount of ₹ 35 lakhs was accounted in the books of account - the amount of ₹ 20 lakhs was received by cheque and the creditor has confirmed by a letter of confirmation that he has given that amount and the creditor is also an assessee of income-tax, PAN have been given to the AO by the assessee, the AO is not justified in making the addition of ₹ 20 lakhs as cash credit - considering the explanation given by the assessee that the person who had given the credit has passed away on 28.7.2011 and could not be produced bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 5 lakhs and as per the Sub-Registrar records the rate was ₹ 5,44,000. Further another property was sold for a consideration of ₹ 4 lakhs and as per the Sub-Registrar records the value was ₹ 4,92,000. Another property was also sold for which the value determined by the Sub-Registrar was ₹ 6,10,000. The Assessing Officer applied the rate adopted by the Sub-Registrar for all the three properties and made the addition of ₹ 1,36,000 by giving the following reasons: 4. As the assessee has explained that registering authority has adopted the correct rate similarly the difference of amount of ₹ 1.36.000 is treated as unaccounted and added to the income of the assessee. In this case, the assessee explained t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ff, the assessee herein, is the seller. Further the CIT(A) held that the assessee has agreed and admitted to the fact of difference in the sale price vis-a-vis rate of the Asst. Registrar. The CIT(A), therefore, sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that the CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition of ₹ 1,36,000 since the Assessing Officer has not considered the provisions of section 50C in its entirety. 8. We have heard both the parties. Section 50C(2) reads as under: 50C. (1) ... (2) Without prejudice to the provisions of subsection (1), where (a) the assessee claims before any Assessing Officer that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yment of stamp duty.] 9. According to the section 50C(2), the AO may refer the valuation of the capital asset to a valuation officer. The co-ordinate Bench in the case of DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Hyderabad vs. Khaja Kutubuddin Khan in ITA No. 1451 1452/Hyd/2008 dated 29th January, 2010 held as follows: We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. It is settled law that when the Assessing Officer not adopting the sale consideration mentioned in the sales deeds in respect of transfer of capital assets and the value adopted or assessed by the Stamp Valuation Authority is more than the sale consideration mentioned in the sale deeds, then the Assessing Officer is duty bound to refer the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the case, we hold that the SRO rates adopted by the assessing officer as deemed sale consideration are not appropriate and the same cannot be sustained. Hence, we do not see any infirmity in the orders of the CIT CA) on this issue. Accordingly, we confirm the same. The grounds raised by the revenue for two years under consideration stand rejected. 10. The co-ordinate Bench, in which one of us are a party, in the case of ITO vs. Shri Harinath Choudary, in ITA No. 1356/Hyd/2012 Ors dated 04.04.2014 has held that procedure as per sec. 50C is to be adhered in its totality which mandated that in the event of dispute by the assessee as to the adoption of value as per SRO, a reference to be made by the AO to the valuation cell. Respectf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion is found to be correct, then that amount will have to be deleted from the addition made and the assessee will get relief accordingly. The balance amount of ₹ 20 lakhs was confirmed by him. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us 13. The learned counsel for the assessee, Sri S. Rama Rao pointed out to the extract accounts. The counsel also stated that Sri Narendranath Sanghi the creditor herein had passed away on 18.7.2011 and produced the death certificate at page 22 of the Paper Book and explained that the assessee was unable to produce Sri Narendranath Sanghi due to this reason before the lower authorities. The counsel submitted that the amount of ₹ 20 lakhs was received through cheque and the creditor is an ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
