9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f any importance, as long as the Assessing Officer noticed the transaction, raised queries and elicited response from the assessee during the original assessment. Assessee had sold certain agriculture land at Village Kosmada at a declared sale consideration which was lesser than the stamp duty valuation, the difference was taxable in the hands of the petitioner as his capital gain in terms of section 50C - As seen that during the original assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer was acutely conscious of the fact that the petitioner had sold certain agriculture land situated in the village Kosmada at the sale consideration shown in the registered document was less than the valuation adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority for registering the sale deed and that the possibility of application of section 50C of the Act would arise. He therefore, asked the petitioner to explain these aspects. The petitioner's explanation was that he had no reason. Any amount in addition to what was actually stated in the sale deed, he was not aware about the stamp valuation procedure and lastly, he contended that he would invoke the provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act. Under such provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as given on 01.03.2011 for both the purchases and the same was converted as non-agriculture land with effect from 07.06.2011. The assessee's share out of the above 68.696 sq.mts. Land was Rs. 34348 mtrs (50% of 68,696 sq.mtrs) valuing to Rs. 54,95,680/- (50% of Rs. 1,09,91,360/-). However, it was noticed that assessee has not reflected this purchase of land in the balance sheet or profit and loss account for the year ending on 31.03.2011 attaching the provisions of section 69 of the Act. As per the provisions of section 69, the value of investments which are not recorded in the books of account are liable to be treated as unexplained investment and added to the total income of the assessee. Thus, the assesse has failed to disclosed fully and truly all material facts for the A.Y. 2011-12. Failure to do so resulted in under assessment of income to the extent of Rs. 54,95,680/-. On further verification of the assessment records, it was revealed that the assessee transferred agriculture land block No. 44 (9870 sq.mtr) and block No. 46 (16291 sq.mtr) at Kosmada vilalge, Kamrej Taluka under Surat District vide sale deed dated 22.12.2010 for consideration of Rs. 56,35,768/- and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessing Officer, such purchase was not reflected in the assessee's balance-sheet or profit and loss account and that therefore, the petitioner's share of the purchase value, the Assessing Officer desired to bring to tax with the aid of Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Second reason for reopening the assessment pertained to the petitioner's sale of agriculture land situated at Village Kosmada, Tal Kamrej. According to the Assessing Officer, the sale price indicated in the sale deed was lower than the jantri value fixed for stamp valuation purpose. The difference the Assessing Officer wanted to tax in the hands of the petitioner on the capital gain with the aid of section 50C of the Act. Counsel submitted that both these aspects were minutely examined by the Assessing Officer during the original scrutiny assessment. Any attempt on part of the Assessing Officer now to tax these amounts would be based on change of opinion. Counsel submitted that in the present case, the notice for reopening was issued beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. There was no failure on part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for that I have already furnished my balance sheet for the year ended 31st March, 2012. On perusal of the ledger account of the said residential flat and the copy of registered purchase deed attached herewith, you will certainly find the detailed breakup cost of purchase of the flats i.e. actual purchase consideration, stamp duty exps., registration exps etc. and accordingly the total cost of purchase of flat recorded in the books of accounts at Rs. 60,99,700/-. Thus, there is no lawful reason to treat the same as unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act. (ii) The transaction of immovable property amounting to Rs. 1,09,91,360/- refers to the land purchased by M/s. B.I.Developers in which I am one of the partners. On persual of the registered purchase deed, the balance sheet of the firm, as well the P L A/c. for the year ended 31.03.2012, you will find that the said land has purchased by the partners in the names of partners of the firm, which has been brought in the books of the firm forming part of our capital in the firm. Moreover, our firm namely M/s. B.I.Developers being engaged in the business of construction and development of industrial/housing projects, the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer allows such a claim, rejects such a claim or partially allows and partially rejects the claim, are all options available with the Assessing Officer, over which the assessee beyond trying to persuade the Assessing Officer, would have no control whatsoever. Therefore, while framing the assessment, allowing the claim fully or partially, in what manner the assessment order should be framed, is totally beyond the control of the assessee. If the Assessing Officer, therefore, after scrutinizing the claim minutely during the assessment proceedings, does not reject such a claim, but chooses not to give any reasons for such a course of action that he adopts, it can hardly be stated that he did not form an opinion on such a claim. It is not unknown that assessments of larger corporations in the modern day, involve large number of complex claims, voluminous material, numerous exemptions and deductions. If the Assessing Officer is burdened with the responsibility of giving reasons for several claims so made and accepted by him, it would even otherwise cast an unreasonable expectation which within the short frame of time available under law would be too much to expect him to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eived by you (as per deed) Rs. 9302164/- Market value (as per stamp duty paid (638610*100/4.9) Rs. 13032857/- Difference of sale consideration received and market value Rs. 3730693/- You have sold these properties less than market value (As per stamp valuation authority). Thus section 50C of the I.T.Act is applicable in your case and difference amount of Market value and actual sale consideration received by you as mentioned in sale deed is taxable in your hand. In this connection you are required to show cause as to why difference amount of market value and actual sale consideration received by you as mentioned in sale deed i.e. Rs. 5991047/- (Rs. 2260354/- + Rs. 3730693/-) should not be added to your total income. 12. In response to such query, the petitioner in his reply dated 13.03.2015 had conveyed as under: Asst. Year:2011-12 (1) In respect of sale of agriculture land at R.S.No. 37, Block No. 44, Moje: Kosmada, Sub District: Kamrej, Dist. Surat and agriculture land at R.S. No. 45, Block No. 46, Moje: Kosmada, Sub Dist. Kamrej. Dist Surat I have to expl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
