TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilar vicinity at about the same time which were sold at price below the circle rate, also filed valuation report of registered valuer and the seller of the properties has appeared before the AO and has confirmed to have sold the property at the price mentioned in the sale deed only and there is no material available before the revenue authorities that assessee has paid anything more than what is mentioned in the sale deed, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that no addition is warranted in the instant case by invoking the provisions of section 69. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed. - ITA No.1959/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 27-2-2020 - Sh. R. K. Panda, Accountant Member And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Ved Jain, CA, Ms. Umang Luthra, Advocate, Sh. Himanshu Aggarwal, CA For the Respondent : Sh. Gayasuddin Ansari, Sr. DR. ORDER PER R.K PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.01.2017 of the CIT(A)-16, New Delhi relating to A. Y. 2011-12. 2. Facts of the case, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ita Ram Bazar, Delhi was purchased by the assessee for ₹ 4,50,000/- only while the circle rate was ₹ 7,60,000/-. The reasons are as under. i. The property is situated in slum area. ii.The construction of the building is very old. iii. The property was occupied by the tenants namely M/s Prem Sukh Dass Jawahar Lai since ages. There was a great element of risk involved in purchasing a property which is occupied by tenants. The assessee took a great risk in purchasing such a tenant occupied property. iv. The assessee got the property valued by a registered valuer whose report is annexed as per annexure 81 5. However, the AO was not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee. He referred the matter to the DVO for obtaining a report on the valuation of the properties. He also confronted the seller of the properties and recorded the statement of Sh. Manoj Kumar Gupta u/s. 131 of the Act. After considering the report of the DVO and the statement given by one of the seller the AO made addition of ₹ 53,47,387/-being the difference in the purchase price and value reported by DVO in the case of property No.3402, Sita Ram Bazar and Circle Rate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circle rate and the valuation as computed by the regd. Valuer, the Assessing Officer was right in referring the matter to the valuation cell. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the action of the Assessing Officer. The appellant has also stated that the method adopted for valuation by the DVO was not correct. In this regard, it must not be forgotten that the DVO is a specialised officer to help the Assessing Officer, 'the DVO possess the needed technical competence to undertake the valuation of immovable property. The DVO has considered the objections raised by the appellant and after considering them has come to a conclusion that no review of the earlier report was called for. It is not as if the method adopted by the DVO is illegal. The DVO adopted the method which at the time of valuation was most suitable. As far as the statements of the sellers are concerned, both the sellers are the interested parties as if the accept to have received more consideration than reflected in the regd. Document, they will also be affected in the same proportion. So their denial is rejected. The appellant has also challenged the valuation report saying that the properti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both and not in the hands of the buyer of the property. Similarly the provisions of section 56 (2) (vii) (b) is also not applicable to the assessee, since these provisions were introduced by the finance bill 2013 w.e.f. 01.04.2014 whereas the assessment year involved is assessment year 2011-12. For the above proposition he relied on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Sh. Sunil Ghanshyamdas Verliani vide ITA No. 3813/Del/2014 order dated 28.11.2016. He further submitted that the provisions of section 69 are also not applicable to the facts of the present case. He submitted that the AO in the instant case has conducted an independent enquiry by recording the statement of the seller of both the properties i.e. Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta who had categorically admitted that the properties were sold at price below the prevalent circle rates. Further there is no evidence in the possession of the revenue to prove that the assessee has paid something more over and above the sale consideration as mentioned in the sale deed. The basis of addition is only on the basis of the estimate made by the DVO in valuation report. He accordingly submitted that the additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and not the seller of the property, therefore, the provisions of section 50C are not applicable. Similarly the assessment year involved is 2011-12 and, therefore, the provisions of section i.e. 56 (2)(vii) (b), which were introduced by finance bill 2013 w.e.f. 01.04.2014 are also not applicable. As per the said amendment if the immovable properties are purchased /received for inadequate consideration, i.e. less than stamp duty value by ₹ 50,000/- or more, then the difference between the stamp duty value and inadequate consideration shall be taxable in the hands of the individual or HUF as income from other sources. We further find the AO in the instant case has conducted independent enquiry by recording the statement of the seller of both the properties wherein he has categorically admitted by stating the reasons for selling the property at price below the prevalent circle rates. Further nothing has been brought on record to prove that the assessee has paid anything extra over and above the value of agreement in any other form of consideration. Nothing has been brought on record that money has emanated from the assesee s coffers. The sole reliance in the instant case is the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
