9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gift by virtue of the provisions of section 4(1)(c) of the Gift Tax Act. By virtue of the said section, where there is a release, discharge, surrender, forfeiture etc in property by a person, the value of such release, discharge, surrender, forfeiture etc to the extent to which it has not been found to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer to have been bonafide, shall be deemed to a gift made by the person responsible for release, discharge, surrender, forfeiture etc. Considering all the above, no infirmity in the decision of the Assessing Officer has taken to bring to tax the value of the land and building amounting to ₹ 37,04,000/- which in turn been gifted to the assessee s son / legal heir, as determined by the Valuation Officer of the Department and accordingly, the same is confirmed. Decided against assessee. - GTA No.01/Coch/2018 - - - Dated:- 30-4-2019 - Shri Chandra Poojari, AM Shri George George K, JM For the Appellant : Sri. Akhil Suresh For the Respondent : Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR ORDER PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CIT(A) and the ITAT confirmed that there was a taxable gift involved in the transaction. Further, it was held that the value adopted by the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) was in order. The order of the Tribunal was challenged before the Hon ble High Court in GTA Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of 2002. The Hon ble High Court confirmed the order of the ITAT. However, the Hon ble High Court granted liberty to the assessee to file objections before the DVO and directed the DVO to dispose of the same after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The order of the Hon ble High Court was challenged before the Hon ble Supreme Court. The Hon ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP with the liberty to the assessee to approach the valuation authority in regard to the ownership of building in question. 4. Consequent to the judgments of the Hon ble High Court and the Hon ble Supreme Court, fresh gift tax assessments were made vide order dated 28.02.2005 adopting the value of gift tax as it was done in the original assessment. The assessee preferred an appeal to the CIT(A) and the same was dismissed. On further appeal, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A) s order and directed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- Sd/- (Ganga Thakur) (Prem Prakash) PS to Registrar Court Master 6.2 The impugned property was originally valued at ₹ 58,66,000 (DVO s report dated 20.04.1998). The assessment under the Gift Tax Act was made on 23.09.1999. The CIT(A) and the ITAT confirmed the assessment made under the Gift Tax appeal. On further appeal, the Hon ble High Court confirmed the order of the ITAT. However, the Hon ble High Court was of the opinion that there was no proper opportunity for the assessee to file the objections before the DVO and directed the assessee to file objection if any before the DVO. The Hon ble High Court further directed the DVO to pass final order within the specified time limit. As per the directions of the Hon ble High Court, the DVO issued a letter dated 17.12.2004 to the assessee proposing to pass the final order as directed by the Hon ble High Court. In the meantime, Smt.Fathima Rahim (deceased assessee) filed the detailed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proach the Valuation Authority in regard to the ownership of the building in question. In our opinion, if the petitioners' prayer for withdrawal of the petitions was granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while allowing the prayer the entire prayer of the petitioners was allowed. There is no substance in the finding of the CIT(Appeals) that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has merely dismissed the petitions filed by the assessees for Special Leave to Appeal. The proper course would have been that the AO should have referred the matter to the DVO as per the order of the Hon ble Supreme Court while disposing of the petitions for Special Leave to Appeal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not merely dismissed the petitions, hut the3ame are dismissed as withdrawn. It means that permission to withdraw the petitions was granted to the petitioners with liberty to approach the DVO in respect of their objection regarding the ownership of the buildings which were the subject matter of gift-tax. We, therefore, consider it fit to restore both these appeals to the file of the AO with a direction that he should refer the matters for fresh valuation to the DVO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee that the Trust have had their own sources of fund including bank borrowal, loan from individuals etc which in turn may have been used by them for the construction of building at later years. It is also not the case of the assessee that they have had excess fund generated from running the education institutions which in turn also could have been used by them for the construction of building. In the absence of answering the above queries positively, the assessee cannot say that she was not the owner of the buildings which the Valuation Officer of the Department valued and determined the value. To prove beyond doubt that the assessee alone was the owner of the land and buildingwhich was gifted to her son/legal heir, I rely on the English translation of the Deed of Partition (Annexure-B) submitted to the Hon'ble ITAT, Cochin Bench connection with the appeal pending in GTA No.3 of 2000 wherein it is stated that, .......... (Page NO.2) She (Mrs.Fathima Rahim) has obtained complete right title, possession and interest in 94 cents of property which the second named possession as a compact plot within one boundary and has effected mutation by thandaper No.67 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
