GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 981 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2016 (6) TMI 981 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - [2016] 388 ITR 130 - Reopening of assessment - higher stamp valuation - assessment in the hands of legal heir of deceased assessee - Held that:- We do not find that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. It appears that the assessee had declared the sale consideration of the land in question as ₹ 87.71 lacs where as had accepted the stamp valuation which would come to ₹ 2.12 crores considering the stamp duty of 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

MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. A.J. SHASTRI, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : MR SN DIVATIA, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. The petitioner has challenged the notice of reopening dated 28.2.2014 issued by respondent Assessing Officer, copy of which is produced at AnexureA to the petition. This petition arises in the following background. The assessee is the legal heir of late Chunibhai Ranchhodbhai Dalwadi. For the assessment year 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is ₹ 87,71, 765/- and registered, with Subregistrar Nadiad on 19/04/2006 vide registration no. NDD/1310/01/55. Registration charges paid on the above agreement is ₹ 1,32,205/- and stamp duty paid is ₹ 11,92,500/- . As per above Stamp Duty the sale value is determined at ₹ 2,12,86.400/- by the Stamp Authority. However, the Agreement is made for ₹ 87,71,765/- only. Hence as per the provisions of S.50C, the deemed LTCG is Rs.l,25,14,635/- , which has not been offered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

: Notice returnable on 06.04.2015. The proceedings of the assessment officer may go on and the petitioner to participate in the same without prejudice to his rights and contentions in the present petition and by way of adinterim relief, it is directed that final order, if any passed, may not be implemented till the next date of hearing. Direct service is permitted today. 4. We are informed that the order of assessment is also passed. However, by subsequent directions dated 6.4.2015, which contin .....

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 fully all materials. Notice for reopening was therefore, bad in law. He further contended that the notice for reopening was issued against deceased Chunibhai Ranchhodbhai Dalwadi and thus there was no valid issuance of service of notice. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel Shri Parikh for the department submitted that the assessee had made major misdeclarations concerning the nature of land under sale and its true sale consideration. He submitted that sale deed was not on record and, ther .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er has not raised any such contention in the petition, cannot be now allowed to raise orally. 7. Regarding the validity of reassessment proceedings, we may recall the Assessing Officer in his reasons had stated that the assessee had sold immovable property vide sale deed dated 19.4.2006. The sale value declared was ₹ 87.71 lacs (rounded off). However, the sale deed was registered with the SubRegistrar, Nadiad on 19.4.2006 on which registration charge of ₹ 1.32 lacs(rounded off) and 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

at the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. It appears that the assessee had declared the sale consideration of the land in question as ₹ 87.71 lacs where as had accepted the stamp valuation which would come to ₹ 2.12 crores considering the stamp duty of ₹ 11.92 lacs affixed on the sale deed. It was in this background, the Assessing Officer invoked section 50C of the Act treating the difference as deemed long term capital gain. When these facts were 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

urvey details. Even during the assessment proceedings, no submission has been made to indicate that the land in question was agriculture land. You have submitted 7/ l2 extracts along with this letter dated 23/03/2015. The Banakat as submitted during the assessment proceedings specifically contains that the land in question was agreed to be sold at ₹ 87,71,765/- out of which an amount of ₹ 17,87,454/- received as Banakat and the assessee would not claim anything more than the agreed c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

asers) and accordingly as per the terms of the registered Banakat the possession of the NA land was given to the purchasers, thus completing the sale and transfer of the land. Hence, the land in question purchased was NA land and accordingly the stamp registering authority had rightly applied the rates for NA land at the time of execution of the sale deed. In view of the above, the stamp rates charged by the Stamp Authority was for NA land and the sub registrar accordingly worked out the documen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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