9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is against the principles of natural justice & is devoid of any reasoning whatsoever. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter any of the grounds of appeal." 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee, who is engaged in retail trading of garments under the name and style of "M/s. Arihant Garments" at Jagdalpur, had e-filed his return of income for A.Y.2015-16 on 30.10.2015, declaring an income of Rs. 8,86,560/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was processed as such u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessee's case was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 3. During the assessment proceedings, it was observed by the A.O. that the assessee a/w. 19 other co-purchasers had vide a registered sale deed dated 22.09.2014 purchased a residential land located at Jagdalpur for a consideration of Rs. 4,34,94,500/-. On a perusal of the sale deed, it was observed by the A.O that the aforesaid land was purchased by the aforementioned 20 co-owners, including the assessee, for a consideration of Rs. 2.71 crore, while for the market value of the same that the Stamp Valuation Officer adopted for payment of st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bove, i.e., purchaser/seller, had tried to substantiate their claims regarding the lower value of the property under consideration by referring to negative aspects in the surroundings and location of the immovable property. Carrying his observation further, it was noticed by the A.O that the Collector of Stamp, Bastar (C.G.) vide his order jk- iz- Ø- 332/c /105/1/2013-14 dated 17.09.2014 in the case of C.G Government Vs. Smt. Darshan Kaur, W/o. Late Trilochan Singh & two Others (sellers) and Shri Ganesh Lunkad, S/o. Late Motilal Lunkad & 19 others (purchasers) [under Endt. No. iq- Øekad /666/ft- ia- /2014 dated 22.09.2014 had refixed/reduced the market value to Rs. 4,34,94,500/- u/s. 17- d ¼1½ of the Indian Stamp Act, as against the market value amounting to Rs. 5,43,68,100/- to be adopted for 2014-15 as per the guidelines. The A.O. further observed that both the parties ( i.e., co-purchasers and co-sellers) have accepted the valuation refixed vide the afore-cited order and registered the sale deed by paying the stamp duty accordingly. 6. On being confronted with the facts above, the A.O called upon the assessee to explain why the stamp duty value of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had argued their case against the valuation that was adopted for stamp duty purpose by the stamp valuation authority. Considering the fact that Collector of Stamp, Baster (C.G.) vide his aforesaid order had refixed/reduced the market value to an amount of Rs. 4,34,94,500/- u/s. 17- d ¼1½ of the Indian Stamp Act as against the market value amounting to Rs. 5,43,68,100/- to be adopted for 2014-15 as per the guidelines, the A.O was of the view that as both the aforesaid parties, i.e. purchasers and sellers had accepted the valuation revised/refixed vide the afore-cited order at Rs. 4,34,94,500/-; therefore, the assessee already having availed the chance of disputing and pleading the valuation adopted by the stamp valuation authority before the Court of Collector of Stamp, Bastar (C.G.) (C.G.); therefore, his request for seeking a reference by the A.O for determining the fair market value of the property by the departmental valuation authority could not be accepted. 8. Accordingly, the A.O based on his observations above, concluded that the stamp duty value of the property to the extent the same exceeded the sale consideration, i.e. Rs. 8,19,725/- [1/20th of Rs. 1,63,94, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, and the provisions of section 50C and sub-section (15) of section 155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections" Although the assessee is vested with the aforesaid right to seek reference for the valuation of the property to the valuation cell, but a conjoint reading of Section 56(2)(vii) r.w.s. 50C(2)(b), therein reveals that such right is available only where the value so adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of the transfer transaction had, inter alia, not been disputed by the assessee in any appeal or revision and no reference has been made before any other authority, court or the High Court. For the sake of clarity, Section 50C(2) of the Act is culled out as follows: "(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), where- (a) the assessee claims before any Assessing Officer that the value adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1) exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
