Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (12) TMI 142

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uation was done by M/s M.L.Aggarwal/Arun Aggarwal at higher price. Revenue failed to bring on record any material assailing the correctness of the findings of the ld. CIT(A) on this aspect. In so far as the valuation report of M/s M.L.Aggarwal/Arun Aggarwal cannot be a yardstick for the purpose of determination of the proper value is concerned, findings of the learned CIT(A) are legal and do not invite any interference. On this premise, we dismiss the grounds of appeal of the revenue. Now coming to the grievance of assesses that the purpose of submitting copy of sale deed of the adjoining plot at 3, Round No. G-4, DLF-1 at the rate of ₹ 20,460/- per sq. was only to demolish the contention of the AO as to the higher valuation but not t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eal Nos. 522/10-11 in the case of Shri Abhinav Arora and 530/10-11 in the case of Smt. Ranju Arora, pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09.passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXIII, New Delhi. 2. Since the transaction which gave rise to the capital gains, which is the subject matter in all the four appeals, is one and the same, we deem it just and proper to dispose of all these appeals by way of common order. 3. Brief facts of the case are that Shri Abhinav Arora is the son of Smt. Ranju Arora and have purchased a residential ploy No.8, Kachnar Marg, DLF, Gurgaon on 1.6.2007 in their name for a consideration of ₹ 1.55 crores. Such property was, however, valued at ₹ 7,40,95,000/- as on 3.11.2007 by M/s M.L. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ld. AO to substantiate their claim that the sale consideration was only ₹ 1.55 crores and nothing more and also that the valuation of ₹ 7,40,95,000/- was made by M/s M.L. Aggarwal only for the purpose of obtaining loan from Axis Bank and it has nothing to do with the sale consideration received. They produced before the ld. CIT(A) the valuation report of the property dated 1.12.2011 showing the same at ₹ 1,55,61,000/- @ ₹ 18,200/- per sq. mt and also the copy of the sale deed of adjoining plot no.3 to show price at ₹ 20,460/- per sq.mt. 6. Learned CIT(A) while forwarding the documents to the ld. AO called for the remand report. Learned AO during the remand proceedings recorded the statement of Shri M.L. Aggarwa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reach a conclusion that there was any unaccounted investment. On this premise, learned CIT(A) brushed aside the valuation as per P&A Valuetech (P) Ltd. and relied upon the valuation document relating to the adjoining property submitted by the assessee to reach a conclusion that the total investment comes to ₹ 1.71 crores @ ₹ 20,000/- per sq. Mt. On this premise, ld. CIT(A) determined the unaccounted investment at ₹ 16 lacs and sustained the addition in the hands of each, mother and son, at ₹ 8 lacs. 9. Revenue is, therefore, aggrieved by the finding of the learned CIT(A) deleting ₹ 2,10,88,000/- preferred ITA Nos.4039 & 4040/Del/13 whereas being aggrieved by the addition sustained to the extent of ͅ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rate in that area is not as much as presumed by the AO but it is not the case of the assessee that the property purchased by them was not ₹ 18,000/- per sq. Mt. But it was ₹ 20,000/- per sq.mt. For these reasons, the learned AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) rightly rejected the valuation certificate prepared for the bank loan as the yardstick to determine the correct market value of the property but at the same time, he erred in taking the market value of the plot at ₹ 20,000/- per sq. Mt as against ₹ 18,000/- per sq. Mt. Shown by the assessee. 12. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. It could be seen from the impugned order that it is an established fact that nothing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed which shows the value of the property at plot No.3 at ₹ 20,460/- per sq. Mt. Further, the valuation report of the property dated 1.12.2011 shows the same at ₹ 18,200/- per sq. Mt. Out of these two documents learned CIT(A) had taken the one which shows higher price. There is no reason for the learned CIT(A) to choose that particular document when the other one is also available. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the smallness of difference in the value of the property purchased by assesses and the adjoining one, we are inclined to accept the contention of the assessees. We, therefore, direct the AO to delete the addition of ₹ 8 lacs each also. As such appeals of ground of assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||