9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment noticed that the assessee has shown Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 103.83 Crores on sale of property at Jakkasandra, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. He noticed that in respect of Plot in Survey No. 22(pt.) and 42(pt.) the aggregate consideration as per the sale was reported at Rs. 5,15,37,316/- and whereas the value as per stamp duty filed was at Rs. 5,48,86,000/-. Therefore, since the value of sale consideration reported by the assessee is less than the value as per the stamp duty authority the difference between the two amounting to Rs. 33,48,684/- was proposed to add back to the income of the assessee. In the course of assessment proceedings the assessee submitted a valuatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of land, the transaction could not be completed till 2010. It is only during the year under consideration, the appellant was able to get the clear title of the above mentioned land. 2.2.2 In 2010, the Consenting Party was not interested in purchasing the property and has nominated the buyer to purchase the property and has confirmed such nomination by joining as Consenting Party to the absolute sale deed. Accordingly, both the land was sold to Chalet Hotels Limited with the consent of consenting party. This is evident from the sale deed dated 11.02.2010 at Para XIV of page No. 8 and sale deed dated 24.02.2010 at Para XIV at page No. 7. 2.2.3 The appellant though intended, could not sell both the above plots at the same point of time on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce on the decision of Jaipur Bench of ITAT in the case of Smt. Sita Bai Khetan vs. Income Tax officer, in ITA No. 823/JP/2013 dated 27/07/2016 and the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Rahul Constructions Vs. DCIT 38 DTR 0019. 6. The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the authorities below and the case law relied on. Considering the entire facts of the assessee's case, the submissions of the assessee cannot be ignored. The sale consideration of these two plots sold on the same day though be separated agreements, is more than the stamp duty valuation by Rs. 3,00,00,000/-. Even assuming for a movement that the sale consideration in respect of Pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained. Since in the instant case such difference is less than 10 per cent and considering the fact that valuation is always a matter of estimation where some degree of difference is bound to occur, we are of the considered opinion that the AO in the instant case is not justified in substituting the sale consideration at Rs. 20,55,000/- as against the actual sale consideration of Rs. 149,00,000 disclosed by the assessee. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the AO to take Rs. 19,00,000/- only as the sale consideration of the property. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed." In the instant case, the difference between the valuation adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority and declared by the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
