9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 564X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing on the material available on record. 4. The assessee raised 5 grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates challenging the action of CIT(A) in restricting the addition on account of Capital Gains in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Heard ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee is an individual. No Income Tax Return filed for the year under consideration and even she does not possess PAN. The case was reopened on receipt of information of Central Information Bureau (CIB) regarding non disclosure of Capital Gains by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act which was served on the assessee. In response to the said notice, an Income Tax Practitioner by name Shri A.B. Bhutada appeared and filed copy of sale deed dated 13-08-2008. On an examination of the same, the AO found the stamp duty adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority of Government of Maharashtra is more than the total consideration received or reflecting in the sale deed. The AO issued notices u/s. 143(2)/142(1) of the Act seeking explanation from the assessee why the provisions u/s. 50C of the Act should not be invoked. We note that the AO has given 12 opportuniti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the valuation made by the stamp duty authority. The AO accordingly adopted the value assessed by the stamp duty authority of Rs. 1,03,20,000/- as deemed sale consideration and after allowing indexed cost of acquisition of Rs. 2,24,000/- indexed to Rs. 13,03,680/-, computed the long term capital gains at Rs. 90,16,320/-. On the other hand, neither the assessee had declared any capital gains nor filed any return of income. However my predecessor vide his letter no.ABD/CIT(A)- 1/Mrs.Amenabatul/Report/2014-1S dated 04.03.2015 directed the AO to make a reference to the DVO which was duly complied with by the AO. Accordingly in terms of provisions of section 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act, the AO referred the matter to DVO, Nagpur for ascertaining fair market value of the land in question. Therefore the second ground of appeal relating to not making a reference to DVO has become redundant and same is accordingly dismissed. The assessee had not filed her return of income for the year under consideration and no such capital gains on sale of land was allegedly offered to tax. It was clear that the assessee did not intend to disclose the transaction but for the information received from C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant between 19.04.2008 to 13.08.2008. In light of above findings, I am constrained to reject the agreement to sale dated 09.05.1997. The appellant has further not agreed to the valuation of Rs. 77,94,000/- done by the AVO, Nagpur and instead submitted another valuation report dated 05.06.2015 from M/s Vastukala Consultants (I) Pvt. Ltd. wherein FMV of the impugned land was determined at Rs. 37,24,000/- in 2008. On careful consideration of facts & circumstances in the present case, I am unable to accept the arguments of the appellant. The provisions of section 50C(1) of the Act are unambiguous and the AO is bound to take the rate as per the stamp valuation authorities. In case where the assessee objects to the valuation by the stamp duty authority and a reference is made to the DVO for valuation then AO is not empowered to go beyond the valuation made by the DVO if it is found to be lower than the stamp duty valuation. In the present case, it was obvious that AO had referred the valuation to the DVO at the instance of the CIT(Appeal) after she raised objections against the valuation as excessive during the appellate proceedings. In these circumstances, both from the point of view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er had adopted properties ready reckoner rate on base rate whereas there were many transactions which took place at a much higher rate than the rate adopted by him. v) It was also stated that the valuation carried out by the A VG, Nagpur was based on well established development method for which authenticated data and mandatory requirement under municipal bylaws had been adopted. It was noticed by the AVO, Nagpur that the land in question was under Nanded Waghala Municipal Corporation. The surrounding area was developed with many residential bungalows. It was diametrically opposite to Shrikrishna Mangal Karyalaya and near Sandeepani Public School. It was stated to be freehold land. In such circumstances, the valuation adopted by AVO, Nagpur is absolutely correct and proper. Accordingly I have no reason to interfere with his valuation report in spite of considering the request of the appellant sympathetically. Section 50C of the Income-tax Act which states that the guideline value shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration where the consideration stated by the assessee is less than the guideline value, is a deeming provision. It is a settled law that a deeming p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
