TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 454X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, the orders of the authorities below on this issue are hereby set aside and the additional ground raised by the assessee is restored back to the file of AO to decide the same in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose. - ITA. No. 179/Ahd/2012, ITA. No. 180/Ahd/2012 - - - Dated:- 14-5-2015 - SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV AND SHRI N. S. SAINI, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri D. K. Parikh, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, J.M: Both appeals filed by two assesses on similar issue are arising out form the order of CIT(A)-II, Surat, dated 14.11.2011 for the assessment year 2008-09. So, they are being disposed of by way o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 1,83,713/- was claimed. Assessing Officer obtained information u/s.133(6) from Sub-Registrar, Navagam, Surat-3, according to which, the value of plot of land sold as per stamp duty valuation was ₹ 4,48,50,675/-. As per Section 50C, value adopted for stamp duty purpose was to be deemed as full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer. The share of assesse as per provisions of Section 50C worked out to ₹ 24,91,704/- and long term capital gain accruing to assesse worked out to ₹ 9,89,396/-. Assessing Officer issued show cause to assesse asking him to explain why long term capital gain income not be taken as ₹ 9,89,396/-. In response to same, assesse submitted that he had come to know that l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bjection taken by assessee and also fulfilling the condition of Section 50C. Learned Authorized Representative pointed out that ITAT C Bench on identical issue in case of one of the coowner Shri Nikunjkumar H. Jariwala vs. ITO in ITA No. 2404/Ahd/2011 has considered the facts and set aside the matter to Assessing Officer to make assessment in accordance with valuation as per District Valuation Officer by observing as under: 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that in the instant case, the AO has made addition on the basis of the difference in the value of the property declared by the assesse as sale consideration and adopted by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) has not been disputed in any appeal or revision or no reference has been made before any other authority, Court or the High Court, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the capital asset to a Valuation Officer and where any such reference is made, the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of section 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 subsection (1) of section 16A of that Act. Explanation. : [1] For the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amy Vs. UOI 306 ITR 61 (Mad.). In which the juntry value is a guideline not instrument la lay down on the assessee . 5.2. Therefore, in view of the provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act, we are of the considered view that the AO was not justified in adopting the value of the property as adopted by the stamp valuation authority without referring to the DVO for ascertaining the fair market value of the property. Therefore, the orders of the authorities below on this issue are hereby set aside and the additional ground raised by the assessee is restored back to the file of AO to decide the same in accordance with law. Needless to say that the AO would afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
