9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 921X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. In this context the submission of AR that there is no column in the ITR to insist on the mention of stamp duty value of the asset assumes importance. We, therefore, are of the considered opinion that in all fairness the determination of the fair market value should have been referred to the DVO to be decided after hearing the assessee and considering the material put forth by him. We accordingly set aside the findings of CIT(A) on this aspect and restore the same to the file of AO to refer the determination of the fair market value of the asset at Nellore to the DVO to be decided after affording an opportunity to the assessee. Capital gains relatable to the property in Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - As perusal of the findings of the co-o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intakunta ("the assessee") assessee preferred this appeal for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. During the financial year 2011-12 he derived income comprised of salary, as Director of M/s Rithwik projects Pvt. Ltd to the tune of ₹ 1.10 crore, Income from House Property at ₹ 52,01,609/-, interest income to the tune of ₹ 34, 866/-and income from capital gains amounting to ₹ 9,56,412/-. He filed his return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 28/3/2014, declaring an income of ₹ 1,70,92,890/-. Order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") was passed on 26/3/2015 determining the income at ₹ 1,72,22,931/-. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t at ₹ 9,32,71,063/-. These two issues are the subject matter of this appeal before us. We shall deal with these two issues hereunder. 5. Assessee challenged these two additions before the learned CIT(A) by way of appeal and pleaded, insofar as the Long Term Capital Gains in respect of the property at Nellore, that the actual sale consideration was only ₹ 9 lakhs whereas the indexed cost of acquisition was ₹ 15,72,774/- and thereby resulting in the capital loss of ₹ 6,72,774/-, but the learned Assessing Officer wrongly considered the sale consideration at ₹ 33.88 lakhs by adopting the SRO value for computing the capital gains under section 50C of the Act. Assessee pleaded that no proper opportunity was granted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at ₹ 33.88 lakhs in terms of section 50C of the Act and worked out the capital gains at ₹ 19,45,270/-. Learned AR submitted that in all fairness the authorities should have taken cognizance of the provisions under section 50C(2) of the Act and referred to the determination of the fair market value. He further submitted that it is incorrect on the part of the learned CIT(A) to state that the assessee accepted the value fixed by the stamp valuation authority and did not raise any objection before the learned Assessing Officer inasmuchas there is no column in the ITR to insist on to mention stamp duty value of asset and that the learned Assessing Officer did not give sufficient opportunity before applying section 50C of the Act mar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all fairness the determination of the fair market value should have been referred to the DVO to be decided after hearing the assessee and considering the material put forth by him. We accordingly set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) on this aspect and restore the same to the file of the learned Assessing Officer to refer the determination of the fair market value of the asset at Nellore to the DVO to be decided after affording an opportunity to the assessee. Grounds are answered accordingly. 10. Now coming to the addition in respect of the capital gains relatable to the property in Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, plea of the assessee before the learned CIT(A) was that the assessee obtained the loan from EDCO India Pvt Ltd., during the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he asset at Jubilee Hills, initially the loan was taken from EDCO India Pvt Ltd., and subsequently by obtaining another loan, by mortgaging the same property, from India Bulls finances Pvt. Ltd and therefore, the interest expense in that respect also form part of the cost of acquisition and eligible for indexation. For this purpose he placed reliance on the view taken by a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No. 41 /Hyd/ 2022 in the case of the co-owner of the very same property, namely, Mr CM Rajeesh, wherein it was held in unequivocal terms that the interest paid to the India Bulls finances Pvt. Ltd has nexus with the acquisition of the property and therefore, such interest on the loan obtained for substituting the housing loan that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
