TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 1204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r as on 15.11.2008 for purposes of stamp duty for registration of development agreement-cum-GPA, cannot be taken as clinching and determinative of the value in terms of S.50C. It is more so, because the assessees have no means of either estimating or evaluating the market value of the property, but to rely upon a certificate as issued by the property registering authorities. Further, the manner or method adopted by the sub-registrar office for arriving at the value of the property, for stamp duty purposes, is not known to the assessees, and the stamp duty, in fact, was claimed to have been paid by the developer. We are of the view that the AO having accepted the value adopted by the Assessees for computation of the capital gains, it is b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in both the cases, leading to the filing of these appeals by the assessees, is that the Commissioner of Income-tax while perusing the assessment records of the assessees, noticed that the assessees are joint owners of a property situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, which was transferred during the relevant previous year. The long term capital gains on such transfer have been computed by the assessees by adopting the market value of the property at Rs.3,56,00,000. However, it was seen from the development agreement-cum-GPA, that the value of the property adopted by the valuation authorities for the purpose of levy of stamp duty was Rs.5,77,38,700. The Commissioner of Income-tax observed that as per S.50C of the Act, the value a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Rs.77,38,700 for the purpose of levying stamp duty, and however, since the Joint Sub-Registrar II has issued certificate valuing the property at Rs.30,000 per sq. yard and the assessee has adopted Rs.40,000, there is no mistake in the computation of capital gains by the assessees. There was therefore, no mistake on the part of the Assessing Officer in accepting the long term capital gains disclosed by the assessees, and consequently, the proceedings initiated under S.263 of the Act should be dropped. 4. After detailed consideration of pleas of the assessee, including the written submissions filed before him, the Commissioner of Income-tax ultimately, found no merit in the contentions of the assessee against the revision proposed. Ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Commissioner of Income-tax in these cases, has no other data, other than the documents perused by the Assessing Officer. He submitted therefore, that the Commissioner of Income-tax erred in holding that there is any error in the order of assessment. In support of his contentions in this behalf, reliance is placed on the decision of the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Eschmann Textures India P. Ltd. dated 21.3.2012 in ITA No.3616/Mum/2011, duly furnishing a copy thereof before us. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Agra Bench of the Tribunal dated 20.12.2013 in the case of ITO V/s. Haresh Chand Agarwal HUF, Agra, in ITA No.282/Agra/2013 for the assessment year 2004-05, copy of which has also been furnished befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egular assessment under S.143(3) of the Act, the amounts of capital gains disclosed by the assessee. That being so, there can be no allegation of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer, while framing the regular assessments, with regard to the computation of capital gains. As for the correctness of the computation of capital gains by the assessees, the dispute is with regard to the value to be adopted for the property in question as the market value as on 1.1.2008. While the assessee has adopted the value at Rs.40,000 per sq. yard, while computing the capital gains, the Commissioner of Income-tax, in terms S.50C of the Act, adopted the market value of the property as on 1.1.2008 at Rs.5,77,38,700, which was the value taken by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of S.50C of the Act. It is more so, because the assessees have no means of either estimating or evaluating the market value of the property, but to rely upon a certificate as issued by the property registering authorities. Further, the manner or method adopted by the sub-registrar office for arriving at the value of the property, for stamp duty purposes, is not known to the assessees, and the stamp duty, in fact, was claimed to have been paid by the developer. In any event, we are of the view that the Assessing Officer having accepted the value adopted by the Assessees for computation of the capital gains, it is beyond the scope of the powers of the Commissioner of Income-tax to direct the Assessing Officer to recompute the same by m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
