Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Rashmikant Baxi (Huf) Versus Income Tax Officer, 19 (3) (2) , Mumbai

Validity of reference made to the Departmental Valuation Officer under section 55A - Held that:- Reference to DVO can be made in two situations; first, the value is adopted based on report of registered valuer and second, in any other case. In assessee's case, fair market value adopted as on 01.04.1981 is based on valuation report of registered Valuer. Therefore, Assessing Officer should have applied the provisions of 55A(a) and according to said provision, fair market value claimed by assessee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

correct.

Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the valuation report of assessee as on 01.04.1981 obtained by him from registerd Valuer and referred the same to DVO. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) was set aside and Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of assessee as prayed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 3711 & 6871/Mum/2012 - Dated:- 30-9-2015 - Shailendra Kumar Yadav, JM And Ashwani Taneja, AM For the Appellant : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala & Shri N .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r under section 55A of the Income-tax Act, 1961; ii. Not following the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the absence of any other contrary high court decision on the matter under consideration; iii. Upholding the AO's rejection of valuation report as on 1 April 1981 obtained by the Appellant from government approved registered valuer valuing the land at ₹ 22,46,250/-. iv. Adopting the fair market value of land at R.4,94,600 as on 1 April 1981 based on the estimate made by Depart .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r of Income-Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai, erred in i. Levying penalty of ₹ 6,48,272 under section 271(1)(c) read with Explanation 1 thereto of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income; ii. Levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Incometax Act, 1961 for addition of income on account of difference in valuation of capital asset as on 1 April 1981 by two expert valuer's." 4. Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee is a resident individual .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

een valued at ₹ 22,45,250/- and after indexation the value was arrived at ₹ 1,23,76,838/-. The said valuation has been taken as per the valuation report dated 24.09.2007 of M/s. Star Architects. Assessing Officer observed that said property is situated at Rajkot, Gujarat which was a very small city in the year 1981 and the valuation report does not appear to be acceptable looking into the status of the property. Therefore, valuation as per the valuation report was found to be on high .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ic method. So, he held that valuation report of registered value being out of personal experience of valuer and therefore, does not stand to professional scrutiny and hence this could not be relied upon. In view of above, matter was referred to DVO, Mumbai u/s.55A(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. However, till date of passing of assessment order no report was received from DVO. Therefore, Assessing Officer estimated the value as on 1.4.1981. Registered valuer valued the property at ₹ 2000 per .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llowing indexation the same was worked out at ₹ 69,97,700/-. Thus, against Nil capital gain shown by assessee, Assessing Officer worked out long term capital gain at ₹ 57,02,300/- before allowing exemption u/s.54 of Income Tax Act. After allowing exemption u/s.54 taxable income was arrived at ₹ 55,13,900/-. The valuation report of DVO, Rajkot was received on 13.04.2011 vide letter dated 08.04.2011. As per valuation report of DVO, fair market value of said property was valued at .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ar lower than the value estimated at ₹ 12,70,000/- by Assessing Officer in order passed u/s.143(3) dated 28.12.2010 long term capital gain needed to be recalculated and to be enhanced. This being so accordingly show cause notice was issued to assessee asking to show cause as to why income of assessee should not be enhanced by ₹ 28,60,863/-. Show cause reads as under: "In your case assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the I. TAct, on 28/12/2010. During the year under considerat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

report dated 24/09/2007 by M/s Star Architects. The Valuation Report has been keenly perused. On verification, it was found that the value had no instance of land sale in the year 1981, available with him. It is also seen that the value has not been adopted by the valuer on scientific basis. He has not cited any comparable instances before deriving the fair market value as on 10/04/1981. This being so, the A.O. did not rely upon the report of the Registered Valuer on the ground that the said rep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

70,000/-. By adopting the value at ₹ 12,70,000/- and indexing the same at ₹ 69,97,700/-, the capital gain was arrived at ₹ 57,02,300/-, which was subsequently rectified to ₹ 38,18,296/-. Thereafter, the valuer's report was received from the Valuation Officer, I. T. Department, Rajkot and a copy of which is also marked to you, wherein the fair market value of the said property as on 01/04/1981 is valued at ₹ 4,94,600/-. The revised working of L.T.C.G. is worked o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- TAXABLE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN Rs.66,79,159/- Thus, as against the L.T.C.G. assessed at ₹ 38,19,296/- the correct L.T.C.G. is worked out at ₹ 66,79,159/-. Therefore, please show cause as to why your income should not be enhanced by ₹ 28,60,863 (Rs.66,79,159 - ₹ 38,18,296)." 5. In response to aforesaid show cause, learned Authorized Representative of assessee filed letter dated 20.12.2011. In aforesaid letter, assessee has challenged the very validity of reference t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

following two cases- In a case when the value adopted by the Assessee is based on estimate made by the registered valuer; and b. In any other case, namely when the value of the asset as claimed by the Assessee is not supported by an estimate made by a registered valuer. During the year the Appellant sold land located at Kasturba Road, Rajkot, Gujarat for ₹ 1,27,00,000 and derived long term capital gains(L TCG) which was invested in new residential house for exemption under section 54F of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

39;s case is covered by section 55A(a) of the Act and not otherwise. It has been further held in the above decisions that for rejecting the value claimed by the Appellant as on 01.04.1981 and making reference to DVO under section 55A(a) of the Act, the AO should form an opinion that the value so claimed by the Appellant is less than its fair market value. In the Appellant's case the value adopted by the Appellant is ₹ 22,46,250 which is more than the FMV of ₹ 12,70,000 as estimat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as on 01.04.1981 under section 55A(b)(ii) is invalid and bad at law. As the reference to DVO under section 55A of the Act is invalid and bad at law the question of adopting the value as per DVO's report (which is called for under section 55A of the Act) does not arise. 3. Some other Judicial Pronouncements supporting Appellant's view - Mrs. Asha Bharat Shah vs. ITO (Mum) ITA No. 1716/Mum/2010." 2.3 In addition to the above submissions the learned AR of the appellant has also relied .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and it was submitted that valuation report of registered valuer may be accepted and fair market value given therein as on 1.4.1981 may be accepted at ₹ 22,46,250/-. However, CIT(A) having considered the same, upheld the order of Assessing Officer. 6. Same has been opposed before us inter alia submitted that CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the validity of reference made to the DVO u/s.55A of the Income Tax Act. Not following the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in abs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ancing long term capital gain by ₹ 28,60,863/- was not justified. In this background, learned Authorized Representative opposed the order of CIT(A) and on other hand, Learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of authorities below. 7. After going through rival submissions and material on record, we find that issue before us is whether Assessing Officer was justified in applying the provisions of Section55A(b)(ii) of the Act at relevant point of time. As stated above, during t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

luation report dated 24th September, 2007 of M/s. Star Architects, Government approved registered valuer. Assessing Officer after not accepting the claim of assessee referred the matter to DVO u/s.55A(b)(ii) for ascertaining fair market value of land as on 01.04.1981. After obtaining DVO report, Assessing Officer rejected the fair market value adopted by assessee and completed assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act estimating the fair market value as on 01.04.1981 at ₹ 12,70,000/- (being 10%) of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

imed by the assessee is in accordance with the estimate made by a registered valuer, if the Assessing Officer is of opinion ;that the value so claimed is less than its fair market value; (b) in any other case, if the Assessing Officer is of opinion - (i) that the fair market value of the asset exceeds the value of the asset as claimed by the assessee by more than such per-centage of the value of the asset as so claimed or by more than such amount as may be prescribed in this behalf; or (ii) that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

laimed by assessee can be rejected only if fair market value is less than fair market value as per Assessing Officer. As fair market value claimed by assessee as on 1st April, 1981 is higher than that estimated by Assessing Officer provisions of 55A should not be invoked. The provisions of Section 55A(b)(ii) as resorted by Assessing Officer for referring the matter to DVO can be invoked only in case the valuation report is not submitted by assessee. Thus, reference made by Assessing Officer u/s. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunal by observing as under: "3. We have perused the judgment of the Tribunal. It is explicitly clear that the questions sought to be raised are with regard to the quantum of valuation which is only a finding of fact and there is absolutely no question of law involved in the above appeal. 4. The Tribunal in its order dated 23rd July, 2008 has categorically observed thus: "5. The first issue that arises for our consideration is whether the reference made by the Assessing Officer to t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

es where the value of capital asset shown by the assessee is less than its fair market value of land as on 1st April, 1981 shown by the assessee on the basis of approved valuer's report being more than its fair market value, reference under S.55A was not valid. Respectfully following the propositions laid down these two cases by the coordinate benches we uphold the contention of the assessee and hold that the reference made by the Assessing Officer to the DVO u/s 55A in the peculiar facts an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Cess paid instead of SGST

Forum: Manpower Service provider

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer

Notification: Exempts inter-state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 09/2017-IT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 08/2017-IT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-CT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017-CT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services.

News: Tax on fuel more important for a dry state like Gujarat

Highlight: For an ayurvedic medicine to be classified under Chapter 30 has to pass the test whether it is for cure of any disease. If the same is only meant for care, then such product would not fall under medicament.

Highlight: Demand of interest - the period of limitation that applies to a claim for the principal amount should also apply to the claim of interest thereon.

Highlight: Government issues new notifications under CGST, IGST and UTGST to grant fresh exemptions in respect of certain supplies.

Circular: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017

Forum: Construction of single unit bungalow

Article: SIMPLIFIED E-WAY BILL UNDER GST

Article: SERVICES UNDER REVERSE CHARGE UNDER GST REGIME

Highlight: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 22th September, 2017 - Notification

Highlight: Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Second Amendment Rules, 2017 - Notification

Highlight: Implementing Electronic Sealing for containers by exporters under self-sealing procedure prescribed by Circular 26/2017-Cus dated 1st July, 2017 and Circular 36/2017 dated 28 th August, 2017. reg. - Circular

Highlight: Amendment to Paragraph 2.72 (b) of the Handbook of Procedures of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015-20 - Public Notice

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Circular: Amendment to Paragraph 2.72 (b) of the Handbook of Procedures of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015-20

Notification: Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Second Amendment Rules, 2017

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 22th September, 2017



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version