TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 877
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(since common property was sold by both the assessees as joint holder), both the cases are being taken up together. 3. The assessee, Shri Bhavesh Chunibhai Jani, has taken the following grounds of appeal:- "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming valuation of Capital Asset as made by valuation officer even when property under, consideration is in dispute and the aspects regarding disputed property is not taken into consideration by valuation officer. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming addition made by assessing of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold an immoveable property held jointly with his relative, for a total consideration of Rs. 2 crores. The property was jointly owned by the assessee and his relative. As per the information received from the Sub-Registrar, Ahmedabad, the value of the property worked out at Rs. 2,99,10,600/- as against the sale consideration of Rs. 2 crores declared in the sale deed by the assessee and his relative. The difference in the value as per sale deed and as per the value determined by the stamp valuation authority was Rs. 99,10,600/- and the assessee's share out of the same works out to Rs. 49,55,300/- (i.e. 50% Rs. 2,99,10,600/-) as against....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the SVA, the assessee definitely filed appeal before appellate authorities or Court under Stamp Valuation Act. The assessee has not produced any evidence to prove that the assessee has filed appeal before the appellate authorities or Court against the said valuation instead accepted the value adopted by SAV and paid stamp duty accordingly. (6) Insertion of Section 50C is within the legislative competence and is not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, (Rhatia Nagar Premises Co. Op. Society Ltd. V. Union of India (2011) 334 ITR 145/1.97 Taxman 249/(2010) 6 Taxman.Com 120 (Born), KJR. Paianisamy V. Union of India (2008) 306 ITR 61/(2009) 180 Taxman 253 (Mad.)." 6. During the appellate proceedings before ld. CIT(A), th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for 50% share and a similar amount was also confirmed in the hands of the assessee's relative with whom he had jointly sold the property. The contention of the counsel for the assessee before us is that the aforesaid property was a disputed property in respect of which a legal dispute was going on at the time the assessee and his relative jointly made the sale of the aforesaid property. The counsel for the assessee submitted that owing to the legal dispute subsisting at the time of sale of the aforesaid property, the same could not fetch market value. However, the DVO to whom the matter was referred to, did not consider this crucial aspect of at the time of preparing the valuation report. The counsel for the assessee drew our attention to p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t to the aforesaid property which was sold by the assessee and did not take into consideration the fact that the property could not fetch market value owing to the civil dispute as to the clear title of the aforesaid property. 8. In response, the ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the observations made by the CIT(A) and the ld. Assessing Officer in their respective orders. 9. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that in the instant facts, evidently the DVO did not take into consideration the fact that the title of the property was under dispute and the matter was pending before a civil suit at the time when the assessee and his relative jointly sold the property. Further, we observe that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....consideration the fact that market value of adjacent properties cannot be taken as the benchmark to determine the sale consideration of a property, the title of which itself is under dispute. 9.1 Accordingly, the matter is being restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) with the above observations. Since the matter is being restored to the file of ld. CIT(A), we are not adjudicating on the other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 1036/Ahd/2018 A. Y. 2012-13 11. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad, in proceeding u/s. 250 vide order dated 13/11/2017 passed for the assessment....