Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 384 - ITAT MUMBAIDetermination of Fair market value of property – Computation of capital gain -Sale consideration u/s 50C(2) - cost of acquisition as on 01.04.81 - value taken for wealth-tax purposes can be followed for capital gains purposes or not - Held that:- The decision in Mrs. Indira Bai. Versus Income-Tax Officer [1992 (5) TMI 77 - ITAT MADRAS-A] followed - There was an admission regarding the value of the property leading to an estoppel - an admission is a statement which suggest any inference as to fact in issue by a person having an interest in the subject matter - the determination of the value for the wealth-tax purposes was a matter of routine without reference to the complete data available - the wealth-tax is a repetitive tax, and the valuation need not be accurate - in the case of self-occupied house properties which do not earn any income, the value is generally kept low even by the department as can be seen from the provisions of rule 1BB - tax on capital gains is a one-time tax on the difference between the consideration received and the market value as on 1.1.1964 - the assessee was not estopped from contending that the value taken for wealth-tax purposes need not be followed for capital gains purposes, that value taken for wealth tax purposes could be considered to be the only one piece of evidence which could be contradicted by the assessee by producing further data for a more accurate determination of the market value. The report given for the Wealth tax purposes need not be considered for the Income tax purposes, particularly for computation of capital gains - this aspect was not before AO at the time of completing the assessment - the assessee filed additional evidence in the form of order in the case of Pankaj. P. Shah , accepting assessee valuation in the subsequent order passed after CIT(A) order and also two valuation reports of the department dated 19.04.90 valuing property as on 31.03.87 to 31.03.88 - These valuation reports of the department along with the Wealth tax report of Shri Umrigar are to be considered viz-a-viz the report of Shri Ganjawala - The assessee’s objection on adopting report of Shri Umrigar for the purpose of capital gains also required detailed examination of the AO, as CIT(A) took upon himself without giving opportunity to the AO. The issue of adoption of value u/s 50C was referred to the AO by the CIT(A), this issue also required to be set aside to the file of AO – thus, both issue of sale consideration u/s 50C(2) and cost of acquisition as on 01.04.81 for computing of capital gains should be examined by AO afresh – thus, the matter is remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication – Decided in favour of Revenue.
|