TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Revenue : Ms. Beena Santosh ORDER PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M) : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-3, Thane dated 25/07/2016 for the A.Y.2012-13 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) of the IT Act. 2. In this appeal, assessee is aggrieved for addition of ₹ 16,88,010/- u/s.50C of the IT Act, 1961. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that assessee is an individual and deriving income from partnership firm, M/s.Shivam Builders Jyoti Developers, capital gains income from other sources. The Assessee has shown STCG of ₹ 5,21,710/- and after deduction of ₹ 50,000/-, the net STCG was ₹ 4,71,710/. On verification of sale agreemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 45. 6. On the other hand learned DR relied on the findings recorded by CIT(A) to the effect that because the sale agreement dated 09.10.2011 was not registered and also the ready recknor relied upon by the appellant is also not reliable, therefore, the Stamp duty valuation of the property on the date of registration is the correct valuation to arrive the sale consideration. In this regard, the purchase of the aforesaid land was valued on the basis of stamp duty valuation by the assessee; therefore, the assessee cannot deny the sale consideration on the basis of stamp duty valuation. 7. I have considered rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. From the record I found that addition was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... some unforeseen circumstances the conveyance deed of the' said property has been registered on 11th jan 2012 i.e. in next calendar year 2012. In the year 2012, the market value for the stamp duty purpose had doubled to ₹ 44,00,000/- from ₹ 22,00,000/- As a consequence thereof, there is disparity between the new market value vis-a-vis old market value for stamp duty purposes. However, since the transfer took place on 09.10.2011 (in the year,2011), the market value for the purpose 'of sec 5OC should/be taken at ₹ 22,00,000/- and on comparison of the same with the agreement value, no additions are warranted u/s 50C of the Act. It is pertinent to note that the agreement for sale states that the entire payment is recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be considered the date on which the property was transferred. The Supreme Court held that when an agreement to sell in respect of immovable property is executed, a right in personam is created in favour of the vendee and when such a right is created in favour of the vendee, the vendor is restrained from selling the said property to someone else because the vendee gets a legitimate right to enforce a specific performance of the agreement. The Supreme Court, while considering the provisions of Section 2 (47) (ii) of the Act held that if a right in respect of any capital asset is extinguished and that right is transferred to someone else, it would amount to transfer of a capital asset. The Supreme Court held that once an agreement to sell is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
