TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence - Revenue also raised a plea that the Assessing Officer has wrongly made a reference to section 50C while making the addition, in fact, the addition is made under section 69B on account of unexplained investment in the property Held that: - The assessee-respondent has discharged the burden of proving the sale consideration as projected in the sale deed. Moreover, learned counsel for the Revenue has not been able to point out that the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in Smt. Raj Kumar Vimla Devi's case [2005 -TMI - 10755 - ALLAHABAD High Court] has been challenged before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provision for the pur pose of bringing to tax the difference as capital gain. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) further held that in the absence of any legally accept- able evidence, valuation done for the purpose of section 50C would not represent actual consideration passed on to the seller. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Smt. Raj Kumar Vimla Devi [2005] 279 ITR 360 (All). In that case the Allahabad High Court has relied upon the observations made by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jawajee Nagnatham v. Revenue Divi- sional Officer [1994] 4 SCC 595 to hold that the basic valuation register prepared and maintained for the purpose of collecting stamp duty could no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record indicating the fact that the assessee has paid anything more than the one disclosed in the purchase deed. The Department has taken an argument in the grounds of appeal that the Assessing Officer should be directed to make a reference to the Valuation Officer under section 142A of the Act. It also raised a plea that the Assessing Officer has wrongly made a reference to section 50C while making the addition, in fact, the addition is made under section 69B on account of unexplained investment in the property. We have taken cognizance of both these argu- ments. It is the Assessing Officer who himself ought to have collected the evidence indicating the fact that the assessee has paid more money than the one disclosed in the purchase deed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome-tax (Appeals) authenticating the whole transactions. Thereafter, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal have accepted the sale consideration depicted in the sale deed as fact. The assessee-respondent has discharged the burden of proving the sale con sideration as projected in the sale deed. Moreover, learned counsel for the Revenue has not been able to point out that the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in Smt. Raj Kumar Vimla Devi's case [2005] 279 ITR 360 has been challenged before the hon'ble Supreme Court and the same has been rejected. The aforesaid view seems to have acceptance of the appellant. It that be so then the principle of consistency would require that the aforesaid view be followed as the correct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
