9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1068X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refiling the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of. ITA No.114 of 2015 3. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee-appellant under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act) against the order dated 28.4.2014, Annexure A.6 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (in short, "the Tribunal") in ITA No.179/Chd/2013 for the assessment year 2006-07, claiming following substantial questions of law:- "i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the full value of consideration for the purpose of computation, the capital gains were Rs. 1.25 crores as opposed to Rs. 73,60,000/- shown in the sale deed? ii) Whether in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he DVO to ascertain the fair market value of the asset on the date of the transfer. The DVO determined the value of the property at Rs. 2,97,98,550/- on 19.12.2011 treating the same to be commercial property situated on main GT road whereas while assessing the value of the property for the purpose of the stamp duty, the revenue authority considered the same to be residential area at Gandhi Nagar. The assessee pointed out that as per agreement of sale dated 6.11.2004, the property was shown to be residential and in occupation of the tenants. The assessee filed objections before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 30.12.2011, Annexure A.4 treated the sale consideration at Rs. 2,97,98,550/-. The assessee filed appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee, under sub section 2 of Section 50C of the Act, the matter was referred to the Valuation Officer and the value was determined at Rs. 2,97,98,550/-. In such circumstances, the value of Rs. 1.25 crores was justified. 8. Section 50C of the Act reads thus:- "50C. (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the "stamp valuation authority") for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed or assessable shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... luation authority would have, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, adopted or assessed, if it were referred to such authority for the purposes of the payment of stamp duty. (3) Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (2), where the value ascertained under sub-section (2) exceeds the value adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority referred to in sub-section (1), the value so adopted or assessed or assessable by such authority shall be taken as the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer." 9. A perusal of the above provisions shows that under sub section (1) of Section 50C of the Act, where the considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the said stamp duty valuation, the Valuation officer had valued the property at Rs. 2,97,98,550/-. The CIT(A) applied the value determined by the stamp valuation authorities as to be fair market value of the property on the date of transfer. Hence the value assessed in the hands of the assessee was Rs. 1.25 crores as against the value assessed by the DVO at Rs. 2,97,98,550/-. The Tribunal after considering the matter held that the stand of the assessee and the objections raised by it against the valuation report had no meaning including the stand of the DVO to have adopted commercial rates for valuing the said property as the assessment in the hands of the assessee had not been made on such valuation report but on a much lesser value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Rs. 1.25 crores as against the value assessed by the DVO at Rs. 2.97 crores. The perusal of the grievances raised by the assessee reflects that all the grievances were against the valuation framed by the Valuation Officer and even if the value is reduced as per the said grievances, there is no substance in the grievance of the assessee where reduced value has been adopted by the CIT(Appeals) as fair market value of the property. In the entirety of the facts and circumstances, we find no merit in the stand of the assessee and the objections raised against the valuation report have no meaning including the stand of DVO to have adopted commercial rates for valuing the said property as the assessment in the hands of the assessee has not been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
