TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee, especially when considering the rigmarole in respect of filing the appeal for reduction of the stamp duty valuation. But that cannot be the ground for making a direct addition in respect of the provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Act. Government of Tamil Nadu has found that the guideline value fixed earlier with effect from 01.04.2012 was very much on the higher side and it consequently reduced the same in 2017, which clearly shows that the assessee should be given the benefit of the revised valuation. Once the revised valuation is taken into consideration, the guideline value in respect of the property would be lower than the actual consideration paid by the assessee. This is also not the case where any evidence of on-money pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment was completed on 29.12.2016. Subsequently, a show cause notice u/s.263 of the Act came to be issued on 28.08.2018 by which the ld.PCIT-5, Chennai proposed to exercise his revisional power u/s.263 of the Act and bring to tax the differential amount between the market value of the property recorded in the Sale Deed for the purpose of registration which was shown at ₹ 1,68,00,000/- and the sale consideration of the property recorded in Sale Deed at ₹ 1,44,00,000/- as per Clause-(vii) of Section 56(2) of the Act. It was submitted that the assessee had replied to the show cause notice vide letter dated 18.09.2018 wherein it was brought to the attention of the ld.PCIT that the Registrar had assessed the stamp duty value at a figu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eted. 4. In reply, the ld.DR vehemently supported the order of PCIT. It was a submission that the provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Act provided for the addition to be made and the Assessing Officer having not considered the same, the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and the addition was liable to be made. It was a submission that as on the date of registration, the guideline value as fixed by the Government was figure that is liable to be adopted. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the facts in the present case shows that the sale consideration actually paid by the assessee in respect of purchase of the property is of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the revised valuation. Once the revised valuation is taken into consideration, the guideline value in respect of the property would be lower than the actual consideration paid by the assessee. This is also not the case where any evidence of on-money payment has been found. This being so, we are of the view that the addition as directed by the ld.PCIT in his order u/s.263 of the Act is unsustainable, when the guideline value as prescribed by the Government of Tamil Nadu with effect from June,2017 is taken into consideration. In these circumstances, the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5, Chennai is quashed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed Order pronounced in the open court after conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
