TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the Income -tax Department and adopt the same as full market value of the properties for working out the capital gains. AO has not done so, hence, in our opinion, the CIT(A) on considering the provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act has rightly directed the AO to refer the properties to the Valuation Cell of Income-tax Department for the purpose of valuation of the property and, thereafter, adopt the valuation for working out the capital gains. Since, the direction issued by the CIT(A) is in accordance with the provisions of section 50C of the Act, we find no illegality or infirmity in the well reasoned order of the CIT(A) and, accordingly, the same is upheld and ground of appeal taken by the Revenue is rejected. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. - D.R. SINGH AND RAJENDRA SINGH, JJ. Sanjiv Shankar for the Appellant. ORDER D.R. Singh, Judicial Member. - The Revenue has filed this appeal against the order of CIT(A), Dehradun, passed in Appeal No. 357/DDN/05-06 dated 22-2-2007 on the following effective ground:- "The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to adopt the value estimated by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 and 31/20, 1-16 Rawat Para Agra at Rs. 31,16,000 after considering all the material facts regarding it. Similarly, the valuation of other properties, i.e., 31/62 and 31/60 Lohargali has been valued by the valuer at Rs. 7,90,000. The above properties were approximately one hundred years old and the roof and walls were in dilapidated condition, which require a lot of renovation and repair works. Also the title of the above properties was in litigation at the time of sale. One trespasser Jugal Kishore s/o Ram Avtar had filed civil suits for claiming his poor title against these properties. The civil suit No. 289/98 Jugal Kishore vs. Manju Rani Etc. (for properties 31/62 and 31/62) in the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division Agra and civil suit No. 60/1999 Jugal Kishore v/s. Manju Rani etc. (for properties 31/20 and 31/20,1-16, Rawat Para Agra) in the court of District Judge Agra, were pending at the time of sale of the above properties. Similarly property No. 4/81 Seherawla Pech Near Motia Gali Chattan ward Agra was actually sold for Rs. 48,000. But for the purposes of stamp duty it was considered at Rs. 76,000. The property was a very old property about 75 years old with an estim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for stamp duty purposes, the Assessing Officer should have referred the case to the I.T. Department Valuation Cell since this was not done, he directed the Assessing Officer vide his office letter dated 27-2-2006 to refer the case to the Valuation Cell. The Assessing Officer vide his letter dated 12-2-2007 submitted his report along with the report of Valuation Cell and the value estimated by the Valuation Cell as on 1-4-1981 and on the date of sale and the same is mentioned in the order of CIT(A). 5. On considering all these facts, the learned CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the value estimated by the Valuation Cell by making following observations in his order :- "I have gone through the submissions of the A.R. and the valuation report of the V.O. It is an admitted fact that the officers working in the Valuation Department are far more technically qualified than the authorities in the State Government fixing the value of the property for stamp duty purposes. It is also a known fact that circle rate are fixed locality wise and not with reference to a particular property. Under the circumstances, the value estimated by the V.O. has to be taken for the purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 16A, clause ( i ) of sub-section (1) and sub-sections (6) and (7) of section 23A, sub-section (5) of section 24, section 34AA, section 35 and section 37 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), shall, with necessary modifications, apply in relation to such reference as they apply in relation to a reference made by the Assessing Officer under sub-section (1) of section 16A of that Act. Explanation - For the purposes of this section, "Valuation Officer" shall have the same meaning as in clause ( r ) of section 2 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957). (3) Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (2), where the value ascertained under sub-section (2) exceeds the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority referred to in sub-section (1), the value so adopted or assessed by such authority shall be taken as the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer." 8. On reading the provisions, it is clear that the Finance Act, 2002, with effect from 1-4-2003, has inserted a new section 50C of the Act to make a special provision for determining the full value of consideration in cases of transfer of immovable propert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e taken as the market value of the properties sold and not the amount paid as stamp duty for the purposes of transfer of the properties because the same was on a higher side in view of the existing details and descriptions given by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. Further, the assessee in accordance with provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act requested the Assessing Officer to refer the properties for valuation to the Valuation Cell of the Income -tax Department and adopt the same as full market value of the properties for working out the capital gains. The Assessing Officer has not done so, hence, in our opinion, the CIT(A) on considering the provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act has rightly directed the Assessing Officer to refer the properties to the Valuation Cell of Income-tax Department for the purpose of valuation of the property and, thereafter, adopt the valuation for working out the capital gains. Since, the direction issued by the CIT(A) is in accordance with the provisions of section 50C of the Act, we find no illegality or infirmity in the well reasoned order of the CIT(A) and, accordingly, the same is upheld and ground of appeal taken by the Revenue is re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
