Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 932 - ITAT HYDERABADComputation of capital gain - sale of land in two parts [different AYs] - basis of the SRO’s letter to ascertain the guideline value of the land sold by the assessee - AO determined such Long-Term Capital Gain as per provisions of section 50C - CIT (A) while upholding the action of the AO in adopting the SRO’s stamp duty value of the property @ 1200 per sft, however, directed AO to exclude the area allotted for roads, parks and open places which could not be plotted as they are pledged to the Govt.- HED THAT:- We agree with the contention of assessee that when a part of the land i.e. 5.74 acres out of the total area of 8.66 acres was sold in A.Y 2013-14 and the remaining part of 2.92 acres of land was sold in A.Y 2014-15, the AO instead of taking the value of the land in acres could not have taken the value per sft which is for developed land with internal roads etc. The final agreement and the receipt dated 28.03.2014 did not alter the nature of land in the hands of the assessee nor did it alter the sale value fixed in the agreement. Assessee cannot be fastened with liability by adopting higher rate of valuation of the land which was developed by Developers in the year 2014 since the assessee had given up all her rights in land on 10.01.2013 itself when the Registered GPA was given to Developers and the guideline value on that date was Rs. 90 lakhs per acres. Under these circumstances when the assessee has sold the land at Rs. 1.05 crores as against the guideline value of Rs. 90 lakhs per acres, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer is not justified in applying the rate of Rs. 1200 per sft which in our opinion is the rate applicable for developed land. Under these circumstances we are of the considered opinion that in view of the proviso to section 50C where the date of agreement fixing the consideration and date of registration and transfer of capital asset in question are not the same, the value adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority on date of agreement is to be taken for purpose of full value of consideration. Also it has been held in various decisions that the amendment to section 50C introduced by the Finance Act 2016 for determining the full value of consideration in the case of immovable property is curative in nature and will apply retrospectively. As decided in Vummudi Amarendran (2020 (10) TMI 517 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) decided an identical issue and has held that provisions of section 50C should be taken retrospectively from the date when the proviso exists. Where the date of agreement fixing the amount of consideration and the date of registration of property is different, value adopted by stamp valuation authority on the date of agreement has to be taken for purposes of computing full value of consideration of such transfer. Since in the instant case, admittedly, the guideline value on the date of agreement is Rs. 90,000/- per cent i.e. Rs. 90 lakh per acre and the assessee has sold the land @ Rs. 1,05,00,000/- per acre, therefore, the AO, in our opinion, is not justified in adopting the guideline value as on 31.3.2014 that to in sq. foot. Assessee appeal allowed.
|