9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing officer for co-sharer of property is arbitrary and unjustified in law. We delete the addition made by A.O and confirms that assessee is entitled to the benefits of proviso to Section 56(2)(vii)(b). X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration of Rs. 70,00,000/- (part payment done till that date Rs. 48,50,000/-) and the market value of the property was Rs. 1,00,28,500/- his attention was drawn to the provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b). The assessee was required to show cause why the difference between the consideration and the stamp duty value (i.e. 1,00,28,500 - 70,00,000 = 30,28,500/- should not be added to his income u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the I.T. Act . 5. In response, the assessee contended that the value as on the date fixing the price for purchase i.e. 17/10/2011 (date of allotment letter) should be adopted. He stated that the market value in October 2011 will be the agreement value of Rs. 70,00,000/- only. Hence, the AR vehemently argued that no addition would entail. Further, the AR contended that letter of allotment holds supreme importance in property deals. It has all the ingredients of an agreement and date of allotment letter can be considered as date of acquisition for calculating Long Term Capital Gain. 6. The assessee's submission was not accepted by the A.O. who held that there is no agreement fixing the amount of consideration for transfer of immovable property in this case produced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e AO, vide this office letter dated 23/05/2018. In response, the AO, vide his letter dated 16/09/2019, has submitted his remand report has stated given below : "a) The submission made by the assessee which was enclosed with your letter dated 23/05/2018 has been duly considered. The assessee has just submitted the allotment letter dated 17/10/2011 issued by the builder M/s. Said Sadguru Developers, in the name of the assessee. The allotment letter was submitted during the course of assessment proceedings, but it was issued in the name of M/s. Manjula S Mehta (his wife). b) It is pertinent to- mention here that the addition made by the A.O. was on account of difference in stamp duty valuation vis-a-vis agreement value. The A.R of the assessee contended that the letter of allotment should be adopted for the amount of consideration for transfer of immovable property i.e. 17/10/2011 (date of allotment letter). On verification of the record, it is noticed, the assessee had entered in to agreement with the builder with regard to transfer of the said flat which got registration on 23/07/2013. In this agreement, the purchase price of the property is fixed at Rs. 70,00,000/- vide para 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00,000/- i.e. Rs. 30,28,500/- is correctly added to the income of the assessee." 9. A copy of the remand report was forwarded to the appellant vide this office letter dated 25/11/2019. In response, the appellant did not file any rejoinder till date. This office has issued notices vide letters dated 25/11/2019 fixing hearing on 11/12/2019. In response, the appellant asked for an adjournment. The case was adjourned on 13/01/2010. The appellant asked adjournment for 10 more days and the case was adjourned to 24/01/2010. However, there was neither any compliance on 24/01/2010 nor any further request to adjourn the case. No response from the appellant was received till date. In view of above, it is deemed proper to dispose the appeal based on materials available on record. 10. We have gone through the order of the A.O, Ld. CIT(A) and various submissions of assessee dated 06-10-2021. Vide pg no-23 to 27 of paper-book we have observed the payment made by the assessee to the developer on 17-10- 2011 amounting to Rs 14 lacs vide cheque no 906740, Bank of Maharashtra to enter into an agreement cum acknowledgement of payment made and other terms and conditions about the property. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m.) (Trib.): Date of registration irrelevant for Sec 56(2)(vii)(b) as substantial obligation discharged on date of agreement. b) Radha Kishan Kungwani vs. ITO Ward - 1(2) ITA No. 1106/JP/2018 dtd. 19/08/2020, [185 ITD 433 (Jaipur - Trib.)] Where assessee entered into agreement for purchase of flat and had made certain payment at time of booking of flat, stamp duty valuation or fair market value of immovable property was to be considered as on date of payment made by assessee towards booking of flat c) Sanjay Dattatraya Dapodikar v/s ITO Ward - 6(2), Pune ITA No. 1747/PN/2018 dtd. 30/04/2019(Pune) (Trib) Where date of agreement for fixing amount of consideration for purchase of a plot of land and date of registration of sale deed were different but assessee, prior to date of agreement, had paid a part of consideration by cheque, provisos to section 56(2)(vii)(b) being fulfilled, stamp value as on date of agreement should be applied for purpose of said section d) Ashutosh Jhavs. ITO Ward-2(5), Ranchi ITA No. 188/Ranchi/2019 dtd. 30/04/2021, [190 ITD 450 (Kolkata - Trib.).] Where assessee purchased a property and made part payment of sale consideration by cheque on very ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
