9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 1267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 65/-) being the difference in excess of 10% between sale value and stamp duty value in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The brief facts as emanating from the records are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the business of construction and development of residential as well as commercial projects and reported turnover of Rs.7,01,53,106/- and shown net profit @ 10.65%. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO show caused as to why the difference in stamp duty value and sale value should not be added to the total income in terms of section 43CA of the Act. We note that the assessee neither attended nor filed any reply to the said show cause. The AO observed that there is no option left to him except to complete the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 4100250 23250 Amar Manohar Bhusnar 3978002 3500000 478002 TOTAL 110402722 102586274 7816448 4. On perusal of the above table, we find that there was difference between stamp duty value and sale value as received by the assessee to an extent of Rs.78,16,448/-. As we discussed above having no assistance from the assessee, the AO proceeded to add the said amount within the meaning of section 43CA of the Act and determined the total income of Rs.1,08,91,444/- (Return of income Rs.30,74,996/- + Rs.78,16,448/-) vide this order dated 31-10-2016 u/s. 143(3) of the Act. 5. In first appeal before the CIT(A) we note that the assessee contended that the valuation by the Stamp Authority is based on the circle rates which adopt uniform rate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10% considered for 43CA addition Hemant Raknikath Shah 41,77,500 33,09,122 8,68,378 5,37,466 Kunal Prakash 41,15,864 31,67,500 19,48,364 16,31,614 Baramati Ishwar Devashi 41,15,864 35,00,000 6,15,864 2,65,864 Vardhaman Uddhavrao Khutale 41,76,858 36,15,460 5,61,398 1,99,852 Amar Manohar Bhusnar 39,78,002 35,00,000 4,78,002 1,28,002 Annie Thomas 59,48,000 51,10,650 8,37,350 3,26,285 TOTAL 2,22,02,732 53,09,356 30,89,083 Note : The CIT(A) mentioned addition to an extent of Rs.30,89,083/- by inadvertent mistake and the same may be read as Rs.20,89,083/-. 7. Before us, the ld. AR, Shri Suhas Bora submits that the stamp duty value is not conclusive for determination of fair market value of propert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,722/- and the sale value is Rs.10,25,86,274/- giving rise to the difference at Rs.78,16,448/-. Admittedly, there was no response to first notice issued by the AO on 24- 09-2015 to the assessee in assessment proceedings. There was response to the second notice by the assessee wherein it appears filed certain details including GPA. Thereafter, we note that the assessee neither filed any application seeking adjournment nor assisted the AO in the assessment proceedings in support of its claim. Thereby, the AO added the difference between the above said difference to the gross income of assessee. The assessee made appearance before the CIT(A) and the contentions of which raised in the first appeal we already discussed in the aforementioned para ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n asset is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government, the value adopted by such authority shall be deemed to be the full value of consideration for the purpose of profits and gains from transfer but however in our opinion is subject to the satisfaction the provisions contemplated in sub-section (2) of section 43CA of the Act. Admittedly, there was no occasion left to AO in assessment proceedings to refer the issue to the DVO for determination of fair market value. As discussed above, the assessee placed reliance on the orders of this Tribunal and they are on record by way of legal compilation. This Tribunal in the case of K.K. Nag Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT in ITA Nos. 1304 & 1305/PUN/2010 for A.Ys ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
