9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 944X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fit should not be given to the assessee when KDA itself takes away some portion of the property for road widening. The DVO has also not pointed out that property already being occupied by tenants and court cases are going on, what could be the impact of valuation of such property. Whether it could be more than what is stated in the sale deed. These things have not been clearly dealt with by the DVO. DVO has simply applied circle rate available and made report. The Income Tax legislation being a welfare legislation has always tried to protect a bona-fide assessee and here is a case where sale deed value is declared and independent valuation done by the authorized valuer, but we find that the subordinate authorities have not categorically dealt with the submissions of the assessee nor has brought out any material on record to support as to why DVO’s report should be taken into consideration. Set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct deletion of addition - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.375/LKW/2016, ITA No.376/LKW/2016 And ITA No.475/LKW/2016 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2018 - SHRI. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY,JUDICIAL MEMBER For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. CIT(A), assessee had filed written submission in support of his case and relevant portion are reproduced hereunder for ready reference:- I. The appellant HUF had filed the return of Income on 31.03.2009 declaring net income of ₹ 563850/- which included Long Term Capital Gain of ₹ 402451/- (Rs. 412801/- on sale of 1/3 share in immovable Assets (-) ₹ 10350/- set off of loss of A. Y. 2002-03). I. That although there was- no escapement of any income, the Learned AO on the ground that the Capital Gain has not been shown as per provisions of Section 50C on the Sale of immovable^ assets wrongly initiated the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act on 27.03.2012. 3. That the properties under reference is part of a big Ahata bearing Municipal No 107/3, Dwarikapuri, Kanpur jointly owned by:- (i)Atul Kumar Garg, HUF (appellant) 1/3rd share. (ii) Rakesh Kumar Garg, HUF Co-owner 1/3rd share (iii) Pawan Kumar Garg, HUF, Co-owner 1/3rd share 4. That particulars of properties sold by the three joint co-owners during the year under consideration are given as under: (a) 1st Deed part portion of property No.107/3B Dwarikapu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whenever road widening is done, the portion upto 50 ft. depth from the existins land shall be taken for road widening. As such the area 50'X70' equivalent to 325. 28 m2 shall be taken for road widening. The building plan shall be approved by KDA after leaving the land required for road widening as would be evident from letters dated 02.01.2006 16.11.2006 of K.D.A. (Refer Annexure-I)The premises was suitable for residential purpose only. As per KDA by laws only portion facing G: T, Road could be used for commercial purpose. But since land up to 50 ft. depth facing G.T. Road shall be utilized in road widening as such the balance land left with the owner at the time of sale deed could be used for residential purpose only. . 1. The premises- was also declared slum are under U.P. Slum Clearance Act 1962, in the year 1982 1985 (Refer Annexure II III). 2. The premises even today is under the threat for declaration under U.P. Slum Clearance Act 1962 (Refer Annexure-IV). 3. Considering the above points, the present market value of the portion under consideration is worked out as under:- Total area of land 593.33m2 Less the land to be used for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y problem and other factors have been considered while calculating FMV. 3. Further, the assessee was given opportunity to raise his objection on FMV of ₹ 3,26,200/- vide this office letter no.24 25/AVO/ITD/KNP/12-13/403 dated: 13.03.2013 (copy attached). They have reiterated that the objections are without basis and the same were duly considered. They have advised that the valuation arrived by them is in order and no further relief is allowable. 6. The ld. CIT(A), on the basis of the submissions of the assessee and the DVO s report, held as follows:- The proceedings initiated u/s 147/148 was valid as there was clear-cut escapement of any income. A.O. initiated the proceedings based on fresh information available on record as well after due application of mind. The valuation by the Approved valuer, is a favorable report as per the convenience of the assessee and the same was duly considered by the DVO and I am of the opinion that there was no justification in adopting the valuation as worked out by the approved valuer Sh A.S. Aggarwal. Based on the above the appeal is therefore dismissed and addition made is upheld. 7. We have perused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
