TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 1322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the record room. The department hardly takes 1% return under the scrutiny to promote the compliance of the tax payment for the public. It is also on the part of the assessee to disclose the true facts in the return. The assessee has calculated capital gain by taking the sale consideration of ₹ 60 lacs in computation of income. Therefore, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Addition without considering Section 50C(2) - non reference to DVO - computation of capital gain, the sale value on the basis of value adopted by the stamp authority - AR has submitted that the ld Assessing Officer was aware that sale value/fair market value of the property was less than the stamp duty value, he should have referred the case to the valuation officer - Held that:- As per Section 50C, AO is duty bound to take value as taken by the Stamp Authorities. As per law the assessee can challenge the valuation made by the stamp authority by filing the appeal against the stamp duty paid before the appellate authority under the Registration of Stamp Act and another alternative is that he can object the valuation proposed by the Assessing Officer on the basis of Section 50C and on tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded was given to the assessee. The assessee also challenged the reopening before the Assessing Officer and filed objection, which has been disposed of by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 04/12/2009. Thereafter, he scrutinized the case U/s 143(3) of the Act. The ld Assessing Officer had reopened the assessee s case u/s 147 on account of not disclosed the value taken by the stamp authority on sale consideration of flat sold at ₹ 76,66,480/-, taken deduction U/s 54F on residential house against the capital gain on sale of flat and excess claim of interest U/s 24 of the Act on housing loan. Accordingly, the ld Assessing Officer made addition under all the three heads by providing opportunity to the assessee, which was challenged before the ld CIT(A), who had confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer on reopening by observing that the ld Assessing Officer had recorded the reasons prior to issue of notice U/s 148, which was also communicated to the assessee vide letter dated 06/3/2009 and thereafter a speaking order has been passed by the Assessing Officer on 04/12/2009 meeting the objections raised by the assessee regarding issuance of notice U/s 148 on the basis of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed U/s 143(3) of the Act, therefore, he dismissed the assessee s appeal on this ground. 3. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has sold his property i.e. flat No. 06 and 08 situated at D-38/A, Ashok Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur for a total consideration of ₹ 60,00,000/- vide registered sale deed dated 28/09/2005. However, the Stamp Duty Authority for the purpose of stamp duty, valued the property at ₹ 76,66,480/-. Amongst other documents, relevant sale deed was appended by the assessee with the return of income filed by him. He has drawn our attention on page No. 5 of the paper book and argued that the assessee had enclosed photo copy of the sale deed of property sold. It is further submitted that there was an audit objection in F.Y. 2008-09 on not considering the sale value on the basis of stamp authority U/s 50C, exempt deduction U/s 54F and deduction of interest U/s 24 of the Act. Therefore, the case was reopened U/s 147 on the basis of audit objection. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer are pari materia with the audit objections raised by the audit party. All the information was provided by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 4. At the outset, the ld DR has vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities and argued that in this case, the only case was processed U/s 143(1) of the Act or the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) is squarely applicable. The ld Assessing Officer has not framed any opinion in processing the return, therefore, the order of the ld CIT(A) is deserved to be upheld. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. It is undisputed fact that the reasons had been recorded by the Assessing Officer on the basis of differences in the sale value disclosed in the computation of income by the assessee, claimed deduction U/s 54F on residential house and excess deduction of interest claimed U/s 24 of the Act. The assessee filed return on 30/3/2007 for A.Y. 2006-07, which can be scrutinized by issuing notice U/s 143(2) by 30/3/2008 not within six months from the end of the financial year as referred by the ld AR. It is also a fact that all cases are not been selected for scrutiny through the electronic process device by the CBDT, which is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he valuation before the Assessing Officer, therefore, the ld CIT(A) also confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer by holding that the Assessing Officer is not required suo moto to establish that the rate taken by the stamp duty authorities was more than the fair market value. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has not filed any evidence about having raised the claim before the Assessing Officer regarding excess value being adopted by the stamp duty authorities. The case law relied by the assessee before the ld CIT(A) i.e. ld CIT Vs. Chandni Bhuchar (2010) 229 CTR (P H) 190 was not found applicable in the case of assessee. Accordingly, he upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. 7. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld AR has submitted that the ld Assessing Officer was aware that sale value/fair market value of the property was less than the stamp duty value, he should have referred the case to the valuation officer. If the ld Assessing Officer disagree with the consideration stated in the sale deed, the onus is on him to prove that the assessee received more what has been declared in the sale deed. He relied on the decision of Hon ble Punjab Harya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
