9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the AO replacing the actual sales consideration of shops of Rs. 32,50,000/- which was the fair market value as on the date of sale by the circle rate of Rs. 55,20,000/- for the purpose of calculation of capital gain. iii) Because the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the order of the AO completing the assessment without making reference to the valuation officer u/s. 50(C)(2) when a specific claim u/s. 50(C)(2)(a) has been made by the assessee during the assessment. iv) Because the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that reference to the valuation officer in this case could not be mandatory as the procedure is to be applied only after the appreci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. The AO referred to the provisions u/s. 50C(1) of the Act and held that the value adopted for stamp duty purposes shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received as a result of such transfer. Hence, the AO assessed full value of the consideration as per the circuel rates and added Rs. 16,69,167/- to the total income of the assessee and assessed the income at Rs. 27,49,520/- vide order dated 26.12.2017. Against the assessment order, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 23.5.2018 has dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the addition. Aggrieved with the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. During the hearing, Ld. A.R. of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the directions to refer the same to the DVO to determine the fair market value of the properties. 5. I have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the assessment and appellate orders and the case laws relied upon by the Ld. DR. I find that assessee has sold 11 shops situated at Sadar Bazar, Delhi and the sale value adopted for stamp duty is more than the sale consideration on which the shops were claimed to be sold. AO asked the assessee to explain the difference in the value adopted for stamp duty purposes and sale consideration declared in the return. The AO rejected the contention of the assessee that the matter should be referred to the DVO u/s. 50C(2) of the Act. The AO referred to the provisions u/s. 50C(1) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng objections, Assessing Officer violated law declared by Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [2002] 125 Taxman 963 that Assessing Officer should pass a speaking order taking into account objections for re-opening assessment under section 147, and resultantly, order was bad in law - High Court held that non-compliance of procedure indicated by Supreme Court would not make order void or non est and such a violation was a procedural irregularity which could be cured by remitting matter to authority - Whether SLP against impugned order was to be dismissed - Held, yes favour of revenue]" 5.1 Respectfully following the aforesaid precedent and in the interest of justice, I set aside the issue in dispute to the AO with the direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
