TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1001X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n prolonged discussions or deliberations, the same cannot be subject matter of 154 proceedings. In this case, the issue of full value of consideration is a subject matter of deliberations and which can be decided by prolonged discussions and a view can be taken, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) came to the conclusion that there is prima facie merit in the arguments of the assessee insofar as subject matter of 154 proceedings, but he went on to decide the issue on technical grounds by applying the principle of doctrine of merger because in earlier proceedings, the CIT(A) has decided the issue of computation of Long Term Capital Gain against the assessee. CIT(A) has been accepted the fact that the assessee has strong case on legal grounds of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the appellant vide letter dated 06/04/2011 at ₹ 3,21,024/- as on 01/04/ 1981 and at ₹ 25,62,140/- as on 06/12/2006 (date of sale of flat) be ordered to be accepted. 2. The assessee has also filed a petition for admission of additional ground taking legal plea challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act. The relevant additional grounds are as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the order dated 10-08-2011 passed u/s 154 of the act is invalid and bad in law. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the learned C.I.T.(A) failed to appreciate that there was no apparent mistake in the assessment order dated 23-12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is reasonable cause for not filing appeal within the time prescribed under the Act and hence the delay in filing of appeal has been condoned and the appeal has been admitted for hearing. 6. The brief, facts of the case are that in this case, the assessment has been completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ) dated 23/12/2009, determining total assessed income at ₹ 9,98,130/- which includes long term capital gain of ₹ 5,63,160/- on sale of flat. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed that as per Stamp Duty Authority, value of this property was ₹ 42,70,896/-. Accordingly, the AO show caused assessee vide order sheet noting dated 06/10/2009 as to why the stamp duty value at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TCG at ₹ 29,86,298/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed elaborate written submissions on 28/11/2014. The assessee has challenged the order u/s 154 of the Act, on legal grounds as well as on merits. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taken into account, the facts of the presence case, came to the conclusion that though the objection of the assessee regarding legality of initiation of proceeding u/s 154 of the Act on subject matter in question not being mistake apparent from record stands accepted in principle, issue is whether doctrine of merger prevents the undersigned from a ruling at va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectify the assessment order by replacing DVO valuation of the property as against stamp duty authority which cannot be considered as mistake apparent from record. 9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 10. We have heard both parties and perused the material available on record. Initially assessment has been completed by adopting stamp duty valuation of the property as full value of consideration for transfer and long term capital gain has been determined by taking cost of acquisition as 01/04/1981 at ₹ 7,14,400/-, since the DVO report was not received before completion of the assessment. The AO has passed 154 order by replacing FMV determined by DVO in respect of property as 01/04/198 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd a view can be taken, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) came to the conclusion that there is prima facie merit in the arguments of the assessee insofar as subject matter of 154 proceedings, but he went on to decide the issue on technical grounds by applying the principle of doctrine of merger because in earlier proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue of computation of Long Term Capital Gain against the assessee. Further, once, the Ld. CIT(A) has been accepted the fact that the assessee has strong case on legal grounds of initiating 154 on subject matter in question, wrong in not adjudicating the issue on merit. We, therefore, of the opinion that, there is no merit in the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and hence, we set-aside order of CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
