9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y comprising of industrial sheds with plinth area of 1,511 sq. metres and the land appurtenant thereto admeasuring 3,641 sq. metres situated at A-5, Industrial Estate, Ward No. 7, Block No. 2, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad, was sold by the assessee and the capital gain arising from the said sale as computed at Rs. 4,39,59,860 was declared in the return of income filed on 28.7.2006. The said return was originally processed by the Assessing Officer under S. 143(1) on 14.8.2007, accepting the income as returned by the assessee. Subsequently, a notice under S. 148 was issued by the Assessing Officer on 30.4.2010 reopening the assessment after recording the reasons. In reply, a letter dated 07.6.2010 was filed by the assessee requesting the Assessing Officer to treat the original return filed by it on 28.7.2006 as the return filed in response to the notice under S. 148. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, the assessee was called upon by the Assessing Officer to explain as to why the market value of the property as taken by the Stamp Valuation Authority at Rs. 11,34,93,000 should not be taken as the sale consideration in place of the lower consideration of Rs. 9,06,00,000 shown in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 per sq. metre, was filed by the assessee as additional evidence seeking admission thereof. The learned CIT(A), however, noted that sufficient opportunity was afforded to the assessee at the assessment stage by the Assessing Officer as well as the DVO, to adduce whatever evidence it wanted to, but the assessee clearly failed to avail the same. She also noted that no reason whatsoever was given by the assessee as to why the said evidence could not be furnished by the assessee at the assessment stage. She held that the assessee was attempting to use the appellate proceedings just to patch up its weak points and it was not a fit case where the discretion to admit the additional evidence could justifiably be exercised. Accordingly, she declined to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee and proceeded to uphold the action of the Assessing Officer in computing the long term capital gains by adopting the stamp duty valuation as sale consideration by invoking the provisions of S. 50C. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The Hon'ble ITAT has set-aside the matter to Assessing Officer noting as under: "The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inter alia on the ground of restrictive use of property only for industrial purposes, affecting its valuation adversely. Keeping in view this submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee as well as having regard to the relevancy of the letter dated 1.4.2009 filed by the assessee as additional evidence, to further support its stand taken before the assessing officer that the valuation of its property is adversely affected as a result of restrictive use of its property for industrial purpose only, we consider it appropriate and in the interests of justice to admit the said letter as additional evidence. Keeping in view our decision rendered above admitting the letter dated 1.4.2009 filed by the assessee before us as additional evidence as well as the letter dated 21.2.2012 filed by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) as additional evidence, we consider it just and proper to restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding afresh the issue relating to the valuation of the assessee's property, as done by the DVO in the, light of this additional evidence. The impugned order of the learned CIT(A) on this issue is accordingly set aside and the matter i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 3000 per Sq.yd. (3750 per sq.m.), However the assessee grievance is regarding the inflation of the value based on the various factors considered by the Valuation officer. 7.0 The report furnished by the Valuation Officer is duly been considered. On perusal of the Report it is observed that, the Valuation Officer has considered the objections of the assessee and reasons for adopting inflated price on the page No. 4 of the Valuation Report dated 18-11-2016. Copy of the same is also given to the assessee. Since the DVO has already considered the assessee's objections and I am in agreement with the reasons given by the DVO in his report and the detailed manner in which the issue has been dealt by the DVO. 8.0 In view of the above, since the value determined by the DVO in the light of the directions of Hon'ble ITAT, is more than the value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority, as per the provisions of Section 50C of the I.T. Act, 1961 the Stamp Valuation Authority Value has to be taken as the sale consideration for the purpose of Capital Gains. Therefore, the value of Rs. 11,34,93,000/- as adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority is taken for arriving the Long Term C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see and the documents collected by this office the following method and reliance on documents has been made:- The rate fixed by APIIC is Rs. 3000/-, which is applicable even for the plots in the most disadvantageous locations. As this property is in a highly advantageous locations, factors have been applied for arriving at the fair market value. Besides this the following information is also available which have not been used for final calculation, but have been used as additional evidence:- 1. In response to this office letter dated 01.09.2016, GHMC in its permission letter dated 05.10.2010 (Copy enclosed) has referred to NOC issued by APSSIDC. 2. As per the sale deed No. 2378/2012, (2 pages of sale deed enclosed) vide letter No. SIDCFURNITURE/MILL/2002 dated 23rd July 2003, corporation had granted its permission for construction of residential cum commercial complex on the said property. 5.0 Comments on Registered Valuer's Report The assessee has not submitted Registered Valuer's Report. 6.0 Preliminary Valuation 6.1 The Fair Market Value of the subject Property was worked out at Rs. 1600.61 lakhs was intimated to the assessee vide letter No. SE(V)Hyd/2795 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t value of the plot can be taken @6,000 per sq. yard. The value @ Rs. 6,000 per square yard comes to Rs. 7,95,48,000 and along with value of build up area of Rs. 96,45,400 as estimated by the DVO, the market value comes to Rs. 8,91,93,400 as against the price at which the plot was sold at Rs. 9,06,00,000. In view of the above, no addition is warranted and the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival pleadings against and in support of CIT(Appeals) foregoing detailed discussion deleting the impugned addition. The Revenue's case as per the Assessing Officer's stand is that the DVO's report herein had determined final valuation of the assessee's property and the same ought not to have been disturbed in the CIT(Appeals) order keeping in mind all the corroborating material facts. We find no substance in the foregoing argument of Revenue for the clinching reason that the relevant capital asset herein is situated in industrial area developed by APIIC (a state government body itself) carrying necessary in-built conditions regarding the proposed activity to be carried out thereupon. The said asset could only b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
