TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y considered comparable case(s) resulting in average FMV of ₹ 118.05 per sq. yard only. The assessee's legal as well as technical pleas seeking to claim her FMV as per registered valuer s report go against the comparable cases and stand declined for the very reasons therefore. Legislature has used the clinching statutory expressions fair market value only - We find prima facie force in her stand that the purpose of stamp valuation is to collect revenue only than that of the FMV which is required to compute capital gains arising from transfer of a capital asset. The fact also remains that this issue of FMV of a capital asset w.e.f. 1.4.1981 has witnessed many booms and slumps in the intervening time span of four decades as on date. We keep in mind all these aspects and hold that FMV of the assessee's capital asset @ ₹ 400 per sq. yard by applying thumb rule would be just and proper in the given facts and circumstances with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Ordered accordingly. This former issue is partly accepted in above terms. Assessee's claim of her husband to have spent ₹ 1,60,000 (₹ 1,40,000 in A.Y. 1989- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acquisition of property admitted by appellant at higher value at ₹ 21.90 lakhs, against ₹ 2.51 lakhs determined, in accordance with the provisions of Sec 55A of the Act the ld AO cannot refer for valuation to DVO and consequent valuation report is invalid and bad in law. 9. The ld CIT(A) erred in holding cost of land determined by the registered valuer at ₹ 21.90 lakhsis based on, without any rational or logical explanation and therefore is labile to through into dustbin. 10. The ld CIT(A) further erred in not considering amount of ₹ 3.74 lakhs spent by the appellant's husband in construction of house property of the appellant while computing capital gains. 11. For these and other grounds that may be urged before disposal of appeal, appellant prays Capital pains admitted by appellant at ₹ 819.54 lakhs lakhs be accepted or grant any other relief under law. 3. The assessee has thereafter filed her petition seeking to raise the following substantive grounds : 12. The Id CIT(A) erred in disallowing the amount spent ₹ 1,60,000 (₹ 1,40,000 + ₹ 20,000) by the Assessee's Husband on Construction of' Resid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is sold, whereas in the present case, the assessee purchased the land. The DVO through his communication to the appellant referred to the provisions of Section 5OC for determining the FMV and the AR enclosed copies of the notices issued by the DVO to the appellant. Therefore, the entire proceedings for determination of FMV as on 01.04.1981 by the ova is null and void and have no sanctity of law. Thus, the FMV determined by the DVO at ₹ 2.5 lakhs cannot be considered for computation of capital gains. Further, the AO erred in law in making reference to the DVOu/s.50C of the Act and therefore, the proceedings are bad in law. Furthermore, the ova having determined the valuation of the land u/s.5OC of the Act, made passing reference to Section 55A while objections were filed by the appellant and made valuation pursuant to proceedings u/s.50C of the Act and thus the proceedings of the AO/DVO are bad in law. 5.1 Without prejudice to the above, even the provisions of Section 55A have no application for making reference by the Aa for valuation by the DVO for the AY 2011-12 since, amended provisions of Section 55A(a) of the Act for making reference for valuation when there is va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t cannot be the contended that the AO cannot avail the services of experts available with the Department during the assessment proceedings. 6.1.2 From the report of the DVO, it is evident that he has duly considered the objections raised by the appellant and arrived the FMV as on 01.04.1981 at ₹ 2.50 lakhs. On the face of it, the report of the DVO appears reasonable and well considered, since the estimation by him as on1.04.1981 at ₹ 2.50 lakhs is almost reasonable and near to the cost of the acquisition as on 22.01.1980 of ₹ 2.84 lakhs (including registration charges and stamp duty) whereas, the registered valuer estimated the same at a fantastic figure of ₹ 21.90 lakhs. 6.2 In view of the above, the contents of the appellant are found to be unacceptable and the grounds of appeal are dismissed. 6. We have heard rival submissions against and in support of the impugned LTCG addition. Learned authorized representative stated at the Bar that the actual date of purchase of the capital asset involved herein is 1.9.1980 since we are dealing with an issue of Fair Market Value (FMV) thereof u/s. 48(ii) r.w.s. Expl (iii) r.w.s. 55A of the Act. He sough ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gistered valuer s report deserves rejection only on account of these clinching aspect(s). We rather notice that the DVO s report dt.30.3.2016 (pages 24-32) has duly considered comparable case(s) resulting in average FMV of ₹ 118.05 per sq. yard only. The assessee's legal as well as technical pleas seeking to claim her FMV as per registered valuer s report go against the comparable cases and stand declined for the very reasons therefore. 10. Coming to assessee's legal argument that the legislature has used the clinching statutory expressions fair market value only, we find prima facie force in her stand that the purpose of stamp valuation is to collect revenue only than that of the FMV which is required to compute capital gains arising from transfer of a capital asset. He further placed reliance on a number of judicial precedents estimating FMV do not deserve to be followed in entirety as per hon ble jurisdictional high court s decision in (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP) CIT Vs. B R Constructions P. Ltd. (FB) that any decision not based on identical facts and the corresponding statute but on mere estimation of FMV; adopting one or the other price as per middle path, would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
