TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll values of consideration for such transfer. Further second proviso to section 50C specify that the benefit of first proviso shall apply only in case where the amount of consideration, or part thereof has been received by way of account payee cheque or by banking channel. As part payment of the consideration is received by the assessee prior to the execution of agreement to sale in the month of June 2011, which we have verified from the bank statement of the assessee and as find that as per jantri rate applicable as on 01.08.2011 (sale agreement date) i.e., Rs. 64,82,526/-, the assesse has shown / received sale of Rs. 1.94 Crore, which is much more than the agreed price. Thus, in view of the aforesaid factual discussion, we find that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... movable property / land situated at Survey No. 91/2, Block No.103 of Moje Village Olpad, Surat for a consideration of Rs. 1.94 crores. The Assessing Officer, in order to verify the jantry rate issued notice under section 133(6) to Sub-Registrar, Olpad. The Sub-Registrar concerned filed reply dated 23.06.2015, and furnished copy of sale deed of the impugned land. On perusal of such sale deed, the Assessing Officer found that the value of sale transaction by Stamp Valuation Authority for the purpose registration valued at Rs. 2.50 crores. On the basis of such difference in the sale consideration shown by the assessee and the value determined by Stamp Valuation Authority, the Assessing Officer was of the view that provision of Section 50C of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... price fixed for the area and the sale consideration would be the rate at which the property / asset is expected to be sold and jantry rate is a blanket guideline for determination of capital gains. The Sub-Registrar has valued the land for the purpose of registration and charged the required stamp duty. The Assessing Officer, thereby rejecting the contention of assessee and made the addition on difference amount of Rs. 55,64,300/- in the assessment order passed on 26.02.2016 under section 143(3) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the addition in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A). The case of assessee migrated to NFAC/Ld.CIT(A). Before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) the assessee made almost similar written submission. In addition to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of agreement may be taken for the purpose if the value of consideration provided on part payment of sale consideration is received by way of account payee cheque or draft or by way of cheque, electronic clearance system or banking channel. The assessee also furnished the details of part payment of consideration of Rs. 9,00,000/- received before execution of agreement to sale i.e., on 16.06.2011 and that agreement to sale was executed on 01.08.2011. As per jantry rate applicable on 01.08.2011, the value of asset was only Rs. 64,82,526/-. All such details are recorded by NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) pages-8 and 9 of his order. 4. The NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee and referring certain case law dismissed the appeal of assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of present case. The assessee also made request for reference to DVO though the Assessing Officer disregarded such prayer of assessee and made addition. Before Ld.CIT(A) the assessee in her submission relied on various case law. The Ld.CIT(A) despite referring all such case law, which are in favour of assessee, dismissal the appeal of assessee in cryptic manner. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that he has filed evidence in the form of copy of bank statement showing clearance of three cheques of Rs. 3,00,000/- each, which is mentioned in the agreement to sale, copy of which is also placed on record. The Ld. AR for the assessee further submits that part payment of Rs. 9,00,000/- by way of issuing three cheques are not in dispute. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the month of June, 2011. 8. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties and have gone through the orders of authorities below carefully. We have also deliberated the case law relied by Ld. AR for the assessee. We find that there is no much dispute on the facts, which we have already recorded in para-2 and 3 of this order. The short dispute for our adjudication is whether the assessee is eligible for the benefit of First and Second proviso to Section 50C. The first proviso to Section 50C specify that in case where the date of agreement fixing the amount of consideration and the date of registration of the transfer of capital asset is not the same, the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority or the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
