TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 1267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lue. As discussed above, the assessee placed reliance on the orders of this Tribunal and they are on record by way of legal compilation. This Tribunal in the case of K.K. Nag Ltd. [ 2012 (6) TMI 184 - ITAT PUNE] for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07, order dated 25-05-2012 held that the AO ought to have referred the matter to the Valuation Officer instead of straightaway deeming the value adopted by the Stamp valuation authority as the full value of consideration. In a such situation where the assessee claims before the AO that the value adopted or assessed by the Stamp valuation authority exceeds fair market value, the AO shall adopt the course mentioned in section 50C(2)(a) of the Act. In the present case, the assessee contended before the CIT(A) about the AO not referring the matter to the file of Valuation Officer but however on the alternative plea the CIT(A) restricted the addition to the extent indicated above. Since, the contention made before us that it is mandatory for AO referring to DVO for determination of fair market value in our considered opinion, we deem it proper to remand the issue to the file of AO to follow the procedure contemplated under the Act. The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5401500 4914800 486700 Bhagwan Arjun Khumawat 4033117 3751226 281891 Chandrasen Jaywantrao Jadhav 6081500 5864000 217500 Gopal Hari Rathod 3920000 3640000 280000 Hemand Raknikath Shah 4177500 3309122 868378 Jyoti Babam Kadam 4116500 3827250 289250 Kalyani Jaydeep Patil 3978500 3846549 131951 Kunal Prakash 4115864 3167500 948364 Navnath Shivaji Dhumal 3978500 3883950 94550 Radhika Sanjay Patil 3919912 3898125 21787 Raghunath Rangnath Tope 4330000 4026694 303306 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be formed the foundation to determine the fair market value of the property transferred. 6. In addition to the above contention the assessee also raised an alternative plea before the CIT(A). It was contended where the difference between the value adopted by the assessee and the value adopted by the DVO is less than 10% liberal approach may be taken in favour of the assessee. Supporting the same the assessee placed reliance on the orders of Pune, ITAT in the cases of Harpreet Hotels (P.) Ltd., Kaaddu Jayghosh Appasaheb and Rahul Constructions and prayed to consider the case in terms of such orders. We note that the CIT(A) observed that the Courts and Tribunal are consistently taking liberal approach in favour of the assessee where the difference between value reported by the assessee and the value adopted by the DVO is less than 10% applying the same in all fairness and justice, the CIT(A) restricted addition to an extent of Rs.20,89,083/- which is as under : Name of the buyers Stamp Duty Value Sales Value Difference in excess of 10% of Sales value. Di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o 8. 9. The ld. DR, Shri Asif A. Karmali deferred with the submissions of ld. AR. He submits that the assessee did not respond to the first notice issued by the AO and no response as such to the second notice as well. In spite of having many opportunities the assessee could not appear before the AO in support of its claim. He placed reliance on the orders of AO. 10. Having heard both the parties, we note that in para 4.3 of the assessment that the stamp value is Rs.11,04,02,722/- and the sale value is Rs.10,25,86,274/- giving rise to the difference at Rs.78,16,448/-. Admittedly, there was no response to first notice issued by the AO on 24- 09-2015 to the assessee in assessment proceedings. There was response to the second notice by the assessee wherein it appears filed certain details including GPA. Thereafter, we note that the assessee neither filed any application seeking adjournment nor assisted the AO in the assessment proceedings in support of its claim. Thereby, the AO added the difference between the above said difference to the gross income of assessee. The assessee made appearance before the CIT(A) and the contentions of which raised in the first appeal we already di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
