9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 451X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to refer valuation of property to the DVO, in case the assessee seeks to refer valuation to the Departmental Valuation Cell and further, the AO is bound to consider value determined by the DVO for the purpose of provisions of section 50C(1) of the Act. Since, the AO has failed to comply with mandate of the law, even though he had referred valuation to the DVO, in our considered view, the issue needs to go back to the file of the AO to reconsider the issue in light of provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act. Hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the AO and direct the AO to obtain necessary valuation report from the DVO and re-compute the capital gain from sale of property by adopting fair market value determined by the DVO. AO is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the other hand, fairly agreed that delay may be condoned in the interest of justice. 4. Having heard both sides and considered reasons given by the learned AR, we find that the Hon ble Supreme Court in suomotu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, has extended limitation applicable to all proceedings in respect of Courts and Tribunals across the country on account of spread of Covid-19 infections w.e.f. 15.03.2020, till further orders and said general exemption has been extended from time to time. We further noted that delay noticed by the Registry pertains to the period of general exemption provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court extending limitation period applicable for all proceedings before Courts and Tribunals and thus, considering facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nical substitution of guideline value as fair market value without considering the other vital factors for determining the fair market value for the purpose of Section 5OC of the Act was wholly unjustified and unsustainable in law. 5. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the wrong understanding of the explanation offered by the Appellant both during the re-assessment proceedings as well as the appellate proceedings in the context of her reported long term capital gains would vitiate the related findings in the impugned order in so far as the disputed re-computation both in the reassessment order as well as the impugned order passed. 6. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the findings in the Registered Valuer's r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s facets was wrong, erroneous, unjustified, incorrect and not sustainable in law. 11. The CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that the reassessment order was passed out of time, invalid, passed without jurisdiction and not sustainable both on facts and in law. 6. The brief facts extracted from ITA No. 610/Chny/2020 in the case of Smt. M. Vidhya are that, during the course of previous year relevant to assessment year 2014-15, the assessee had sold a vacant land at Korattur village, Ambattur Municipal Limit, jointly owned by the assessee and her husband Shri. R. Murali for a consideration of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- and the guideline value of the property as per registered document was at Rs. 6,27,84,000/-. Since, the assessee has not filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellant authority. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed a valuation report obtained from the registered valuer, who has arrived at fair market value of the property at Rs. 500 sq.ft., as against guideline value of the property determined by the stamp duty authority at Rs. 2500 sq.ft. The ld. CIT(A), after considering relevant submissions of the assessee rejected arguments of the assessee, including valuation report obtained from registered valuer and determined full value of consideration as per section 50C of the Act and computed long term capital gains derived from sale of property at Rs. 2,18,38,612/-, after allowing indexed cost of acquisition and exemption u/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e AO is bound to adopt value determined by the DVO. In this case, the assessee has requested for reference to DVO and the Assessing Officer has referred valuation of property to Departmental Valuation Cell. Further, the AO admitted fact that the DVO did not submit valuation report. Therefore, he has completed assessment by adopting guideline value fixed by the authorities for payment of stamp duty. In our considered view, the mandate of law as prescribed u/s. 50C(2) of the Act, is that the AO is bound to refer valuation of property to the DVO, in case the assessee seeks to refer valuation to the Departmental Valuation Cell and further, the AO is bound to consider value determined by the DVO for the purpose of provisions of section 50C(1) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
