Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (12) TMI 386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bring any material on record to controvert the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act is found to be squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the addition as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act, is upheld. Decided against assessee. - Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Hardik Vora, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Prasad Rao Waghe Annasaheb, Sr. DR ORDER PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad (in short the CIT(A)), dated 14.07.2023 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. There was a delay of 57 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining that the delay was caused due to pre-occupation of his Accountant Shri Mehul Jayantilal Shah who was busy in finalization of accounts and filing tax returns. Further, the assessee was also not available and was out of country for a considerable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion by Dayalbaug Co-op. Housing Society on the basis of Banakhat dated 15.07.1964 executed by one Sh. Laxmichand Rugnath Patel and on payment of Rs. 1,41,600/-. However, the land was in green belt and hence, it was not possible to convert the land in NA. Therefore, the society could not have purchased the above land as only an agriculturist can buy the agricultural land. Due to this reason, Dayalbaug Co-op. Housing Society had signed the sale deed as a confirming party. As regarding merits of the addition, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had objected to the proposed addition by the AO on the ground that the stamp duty value was higher than the fair market value of the property. The AO, on the basis of the objection of the assessee, had referred the matter to the DVO. However, since the report of the DVO was not received at the time of passing of assessment order, the AO had made the addition. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed certain relief on the basis of DVO s report, which was received during the pendency of appeal proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had also raised objection to the valuation as made by the DVO, which was not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of 4674 sq. mt. old tenure agriculture land, whose surrounding boundaries are as under. [Emphasis supplied] East : Nala road and Revenue survey no. 202 West : Survey no. 198 North : Survey no. 196 and 203 South : Survey no. 199 As per final plot no. 101/1 surround boundaries details East : 9 meter propose T. P. road West : 18 meter propose T. P. road North : 9 meter propose T. P. road South : leaving 9 meter propose T. P. road G.M.D.C. Tower. As per final plot no. 101/2 surround boundaries details East : 18 meter propose T. P. road West : Final plot no. 100 North : Final plot no. 105 South : Final Plot no. 103 That way surrounded center land, in it lying all trees, leaf, bid, shed, wall fallen leafs with it all. 10. It is evident from the above schedule that the total area of the plot was 7790 sq. mtr. and the final plot nos. 101/1, 101/2 had area of 4674 sq. mtr. The consideration as per sale deed was in respect of this area only. Be that as it may, what is relevant is not actual area of the plot as mentioned in the sale deed but the stamp duty value of the property purchased. The fact that the stamp duty value of the property was Rs. 12,79,67,530/- has not been disputed. This sta .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ea and bringing on record comparable sale cases, estimated the value of the property at Rs 11,56,82,000/-. He also granted opportunity to the appellant after preliminary valuation and considered the objection before arriving at the final estimated FMV. The appellant has not objected to the comparable sale instances used by the DVO. The consideration paid for purchase by the appellant as per registered deed is Rs 10,28,28,000/- which is much lower than the fair market estimate by DVO. The objections raised by the appellant were duly dealt with by the DVO while making the estimate. 6.3.1 It is added that the total land purchased by the appellant, as per the registered deed is 7790 sqm. 40% of the same is acquired by the government for general public usages/utilities as per law. The area sold and accounted for as 4674 sqm is clearly mentioned as the two plots 101/1/ 101/2 carved out of the total area that are the two be used by the appellant. But purchaser has to pay the price as well as the stamp duty for the entire parcel of the land i.e. 7790 sqm and not 4674 sqm. Hence in contrast to the claim, the DVO has correctly made the valuation of full piece of land of 7790 sq m. The appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at the said proviso shall apply only in a case where the amount of consideration referred to therein, or a part thereof, has been paid by any mode other than cash on or before the date of the agreement for the transfer of such immovable property......... There was no provision to ignore the variation. Therefore, for the year in appeal, i. e. AY 2015-16, such plea has no basis and is rejected. 6.4 As the DVO has fixed the fair market valuation of the property at Rs 11,56,82,000/- as against the AO calculating the same at Rs 12,79,67,530/-; value as per the DVO report is to be adopted. The alternate plea by the appellant that the value should be taken as per the valuation report of the valuation officer succeeds. Therefore the addition of amount of Rs 1,28,54,000/- by the AO is confirmed as the income from the other sources of the appellant as per the deeming provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act. Balance amount of Rs. 1,22,85,530/- is directed to be deleted. Ground of appeal 1 is partly allowed. 12. It is, thus, found that the Ld. CIT(A) had dealt with all the objections raised by the assessee and given a categorical finding. The objections of the assessee is also found .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates