Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 218 - AT - Income TaxSlump sale - valuation of property - capital gains on building and rental income - uideline value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority for the purpose of Stamp Duty - Held that:- In the present case, the assessee shows the sale consideration through valid sale deed executed on 9.11.2011 at ₹ 20,74,60,400/-. However, after a long period of around three years, n 17.12.2014, the assessee said to be rectified the sale deed through registered rectification deed and lowered the sale consideration to ₹ 2,27,386/-. The valuation by DVO was under sec. 50C was at ₹ 20,48,38,430/-. The Assessing Officer considered the original sale deed value reflected in the original sale deed dated 9.11.2011 at ₹ 20,74,60,400/- which is higher than the value determined by the DVO at ₹ 20,48,38,430/- and accordingly, calculated the capital gains. In our opinion, DVO’s valuation to be considered for calculating the capital gains. The sale deed is executed on a stamp paper and signed by both the parties to the sale deed, witnessed by appropriate witnesses. Being so, any apparent error noticed after the execution of the sale deed could be rectified by rectification deed. In the present case, the assessee wants to rectify the total consideration paid and received by other parties which is clearly mentioned in the sale deed by substituting the sale consideration at ₹ 2,27,386/- in place of original sale consideration of ₹ 20,74,64,400/-. This is not a factual error pertaining to this transaction and the reason submitted by the ld.AR for rectification is shocking to the conscious of the Bench. In our opinion, such rectification cannot be given any credence and it cannot be said that it is bona fide. The assessee’s contention is that the purchaser also agreed that the consideration passed was only ₹ 2,27,386/- and actually the consideration of ₹ 20.74,64,400/- is not at all passed to the other party. We cannot appreciate this argument of the assessee’s ld. AR. We do not say that there cannot be chances of occurring some mistakes. It may happen in the process of execution of documents and that mistake cannot be to such exent of changing the consideration in such a manner. There can be typing errors in mentioning the sale value at figures as compared to in words and this type of errors can be said that typographical errors happened in the normal course. The assessee with the malafide intention, after a period of three years, changed the consideration which cannot be appreciated by this Tribunal. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the consideration shown in the original sale deed dated 9.11.2011 i.e ₹ 20,74,64,400/- has to be considered for determination of the capital gain arising out of the transfer of the capital asset in this case. We therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue. - Decided in favour of revenue
|