9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uka Mulshi by adopting the sale consideration at Rs. 1,07,00,000/-. From the sale deed dated 27-08-2005, the AO noted that although the sale consideration received has been shown at Rs. 1,07,00,000, however, the value adopted by the stamp valuation authority in respect of the said capital asset is Rs. 1,19,30,000/-. He, therefore, asked the assessee to explain as to why the provisions of section 50C shall not be applied. The assessee vide letter dated 30-03-2007 made an application to refer the valuation of the capital asset to the valuation officer. The AO further noted from the details filed by the assessee that the value adopted by the stamp valuation authority at Rs. 1,19,30,500/- in respect of the said capital asset has been disputed by the assessee before the Collector of stamps, Pune (Rural) and the Collector has upheld the value of the capital asset for stamp duty purpose at Rs. 1,19,30,500/-. The AO, therefore, held that the Department is not obliged to refer the valuation of the capital asset to the valuation officer in view of provisions of section 50C(2) of the I.T. Act. The assessee reiterated that the matter should be referred to the valuation officer under the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer,' (b) the value so adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (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 A 0. 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 reference made by the Assessing Officer under sub-section (1) of section 16A of that Act." Therefore, the condition u/s 50C(2)(b) of the Act, is that the value adopted or assessed by the Stamp Valuation authority should not have been disputed in appeal / revision; and no reference should have been made before any authority, court or high court. The main issue of dispute is whether adjudication made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applied by the A.O. In view of this discussion ground Nos. 3,4, and 5 are liable to be dismissed." 8. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us with the following grounds : "1. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals has erred in adopting Stamp Duty Valuation as "Full Value of Consideration" u/s.50C against actual consideration received for transfer of right in land. Appellant prays to declare that section 50C has no application to the Assessee's case. 2. Without prejudice to Ground No.1, lower authorities have erred in not referring the matter to "Valuation Officer" u/s.50C(2), same may be directed to be referred. 3. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming Assessing Officer's action of computing Short Term Capital Gain on sale of demolition material of shed and Building at Rs. 51,300/- against claim of Short Term Loss of Rs. 1,82,677/-. Loss claimed may please be allowed. 4. Lower authorities have erred in charging interest u/s.234B and confirming the same. Appellant prays for deletion of the same. 5. Appellant prays for just and equitable relief." 9. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessee's land was notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion to refer the matter to the DVO which is mandatory. 12. So far as the computation of short term capital gain is concerned he submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has wrongly stated that the assessee has not submitted anything on this point. He submitted that computation of income with balance sheet for 31- 03-2005 and 31-03-2006 were submitted and the issue was explained to the CIT(A). However, since a number of hearings have taken place before CIT(A) he might have forgotten. Therefore, the issue may be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication of the issue in the light of the documents filed before him. 13. The Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand submitted that whether the impugned land was a part of Forest land or not has not been adjudicated by the CIT(A). Even assuming but not admitting that the said land was a Forest land, the assessee has the first right over the land and hence section 50C is applicable in this case. He submitted that since the dispute regarding the valuation of the land has already been adjudicated by the Collector of Stamps, it is not open to the assessee to again dispute the valuation. Therefore, as per the provisions of section 50C( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
