TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 848X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e DVO in his report has valued the properties after considering the sale consideration of the properties in the vicinity and the total built up area of the properties. Whereas, the approved valuer without considering any sale instances and the prevailing rates estimated the value at much higher unrealistic rates. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) after considering the report of DVO and comparing it with the value declared by the assessee as per Govt. ready reckoner accepted the value of properties declared by the assessee. The value declared by the assessee as per Govt. ready reckoner and the valuation report submitted by the DVO are almost in the same range, barring minor variations. We concur with the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in adopting the value of the properties declared by the assessee as per Govt. ready reckoner and excluding Agri. Land from the list of assets assessable under Wealth Tax Act. - WTA Nos. 02 to 06/PN/ 2015 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2016 - SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM For The Assessee : Smt. Deepa Khare For The Revenue : Shri Hitendra Ninawe ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM : These set of fiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0,420/- 2009-10 13-01-2012 ₹ 53,70,749/- The assessments were made in all the impugned assessment years u/s. 16(3) r.w.s. 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). In the return of wealth the assessee had declared seven immovable properties and four movable assets. Out of the declared properties, two properties were not liable to wealth tax. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer accepted the value of two immovable properties shown by the assessee as per Govt. ready reckoner and the value of movable assets declared by the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the value of remaining three properties declared by the assessee as per Govt. ready reckoner. The details of the said three properties are as under: Sr. No. Description Purchase date value 1 Shop No. 4, S. No. 591/6B, Ganesh Wadi, Jalgaon Out of division of family in June, 1992 2 a. Plot No. 4 to 14 at G. No. 23/3B, Khedi Village, Jal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the valuation declared by the assessee was more than the value computed by the DVO. In respect of agricultural land, the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) held that in view of amendment of section 2(ea) by Finance Act, 2013 w.e.f. 01-04-1993 the agriculture land is not an asset liable to Wealth Tax. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) accordingly directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made on account of under valuation of properties i.e. Shop No. 4, Ganesh Wadi, Jalgaon, Plot No. 4 to 14 and Plot No. 21 to 25, Khedi Village, Jalgaon and Agri. Land No. 57/5 6 at Khedi Village, Jalgaon (1/4th Share of assessee). In all the impugned assessment years the Revenue has come in appeal assailing the findings of Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals). 4. Shri Hitendra Ninawe representing the Department vehemently supported the findings of the Assessing Officer in adopting the value of properties declared in the valuation report furnished by the assessee to the bank. The ld. DR contended that a perusal of the documents on record clearly show that the assessee has deliberately offered less value in respect of the three properties i.e. Shop No. 4, Ganesh Wadi, Jalg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r market value. The Assessing Officer in such situation ought to have referred the matter to DVO for determining the correct valuation of the properties in question. The ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the report submitted by the DVO at pages 31 to 46 of the paper book. The ld. Counsel submitted that the value adopted by the DVO is based on the specific sale instances in the area, therefore the same is authentic and reliable. The DVO in his report has categorically stated that the report given by the registered valuer is without any basis. The registered valuer has not given any sale instances or measured the built up area rate. It is not clear from the report as to how he has arrived at the final built up area rate. Thus, no reliance can be placed on the report of the approved valuer which was obtained for the limited purpose of obtaining higher loan from the bank. In support of her submissions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: i. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Prasad Productions (P.) Ltd., 259 ITR 88 (Mad); ii. Raja Baldeodas Birla Santati Kosh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 189 ITR 613 (Cal); iii. A.R. Nagarajan Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Govt. ready reckoner accepted the value of properties declared by the assessee. The value declared by the assessee as per Govt. ready reckoner and the valuation report submitted by the DVO are almost in the same range, barring minor variations. 8. As regards Agricultural Land No. 57/5 6 at Khedi Village, Jalgaon (1/4th Share of assessee), the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) excluded the same from the list of assets with the following observations: 9.11 In view of the above facts, I am of the considered opinion that the said agricultural land having Gut No.57/5 and 6 is an agricultural land in the record of Government and it is under cultivation till date. There is nothing brought on record by the A.O. in support of his contention that the construction of a building is permissible or not. However, the appellant has not obtained any NA permission of the said land for NA use and not used for non agricultural purposes. 9.12 Thus, taking into account of the facts of the case and considering the retrospective amendment by Finance Act, with effect from 01-04- 1993, I hold that the said land is an agricultural land in the record of government and it is under cultiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
