TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1022X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the present appeal by the assessee are as follows : The Assessee and his brother one Mr. Dilip Kumar Addy, were co-owners of the property at 71/1, Hazra Road, Kokata-700019 (herein after referred to as property). The assessee and his brother had half share each over the property. By a registered sale deed dated 04.03.2009, the property was sold for a consideration of ₹ 90 lakhs. The registrar of Assurances valued the property for the purpose of stamp duty and registration at a sum of ₹ 2,76,76,138/-. Sec.45 of the Act lays down that any profit or gain arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall be chargable to income tax under the head capital gains and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. Sec.48 lays down the method of computation of long term capital gain and it reads as follows: Sec.48: The income chargeable under the head Capital gains shall be computed, by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset the following amounts, namely :- (i) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Capital Gain (Rs.2,76,76,138.00-Rs.2,52,61,128.00) Rs.24,15,010.00 Appellant s share 50% (Rs.24,15,010.00 x 50%) Rs.12,07,505.00 Less : Investment in 54EC Bonds Rs.40,00,000.00 Taxable Long Term Capital Gain NIL 4. It can be seen from the computation of capital gain as filed by the Assessee that the Assessee has adopted the full value of consideration received on transfer the value of the property as adopted by the Registrar of Assurances for the purpose of stamp duty and registration charges. The AO however noticed in the case of the other coowner Shri Dilip Kumar Addy, a reference was made by his AO to DVO and DVO had estimated the fair market value of the property as on 1.04.1999 at ₹ 14,56,208/-. The AO adopted the fair market value of the property as on 1.4.1981 at ₹ 14,56,208/- as given in the DVO s report and allowed indexation thereon. The AO computed long term capital gain as follows :- The L.T.C.G. on property sale is calculated as under :- Sale price of property : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever did not accept the aforesaid submissions and he held as follows :- I carefully considered the material before me. I found that the appellant filed return in response to notice u/s. 148 of the IT Act showed income form capital gain Nil. The appellant gave the calculation of capital gain in said return, wherein value determined by Stamp Valuation Authority was taken by sale value of property. In this way the appellant followed the provision of section 50C( 1) of the Act. The appellant did not dispute stamp authority value, the provision of section 50C(2) also does not apply. The DVO determined the value of property as on 01/04/1981 at ₹ 14,56,208/- and indexed cost of property as on 01/04/1981 came to ₹ 84,75,131/-. The appellant was owner of 50% of the property. The argument of the AIR that AO is duty bound that he should accept the sale value of the property which determined by the DVO in his brother's case of the said property. In this case, the appellant in return of income himself shown the sale value of the property of ₹ 1,38,38,069/-. Then, the AO rightly taken the value which shown by the appellant in his return of income. So, the argumen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (5) and (6) of section 16A, clause (i) of sub-section 91) 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 sub-section (1) of section 16A of that Act. Explanation For the purposes of this section , Valuation Officer shall have the same meaning as in clause (r) of section 2 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957). (3) Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (2), where the value ascertained under sub-section (2) exceeds the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority referred to in sub-section (1), the value so adopted or assessed by such authority shall be taken as the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer. In the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT ITA 221 of 2013 GA No.3686 of 2013 High Court of Calcutta, it has been held that the Valuation by the departmental valuation officer, contemplated under section 50C, is required to avoi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
