9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bearing numbers 306 & 307 at Rustomjee Sterling, 14B, SV Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai 400 054, on a consideration of Rs. 76,66,779/- & Rs. 1,30,82,298/- respectively, as against the stamp duty value as on 2010 to the tune of Rs. 1,79,59,500/- and Rs. 2,76,95,500/- respectively, as per stamp duty valuation and therefore the Assessing Officer (AO) show caused the Assessee "as to why the differential amount of the stamp duty valuation and the purchase value be not added in the income of the Assessee". The Assessee in response to show cause, responded and submitted that booking of the said properties has been made in the year 2010 and payments were spread over the years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2014-15. The AO verified the claim and the payment sch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t find the same acceptable and ultimately made the addition of Rs. 28,85,923/- being difference between stamp duty value and the purchase value as disclosed by the Assessee by observing and holding as under: "6. The Assessee has booked the properties in the year 2010 and made the part payments for unit no. 306 at Rs. 7,08,000/ and unit no. 307 at Rs. 10,45,000/-. Though the Assessee has booked the properties in the year 2010, majority of the payments have been made in the subsequent years. Even the stamp duty authority has been valued the properties for the year 2010 of Rs. 90,44,500/- for unit no 306 and Rs. 1,45,90,500/- for unit no. 307. The provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b) also speak about the difference between the purchase value a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1,45,90,500/- for unit no. 307. The AO then used the same for the calculation of income 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act. The appellant argued that the stamp duty valuation received from the registrar seems to be on estimated basis and for the 2nd property ie. Unit no. 307, the registrar had applied the same rate for both office area and parking area. The appellant had submitted the stamp duty value of the properties as per ready reckoner 2010 which is Rs. 89,33,463/- for unit no. 306 and Rs. 1,35,96,759/- for unit no. 307. I am inclined to accept the appellant's submission of the stamp duty value of the properties. The difference in the stamp duty value and the consideration is, therefore, calculated as under: Particulars Property (U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmissions of the Assessee himself, which for the sake of gravity is reproduced herein below: Particulars Property (Unit No.306) Property 2 (Unit No. 307) Total Stamp duty value of 2010 89,33,463/- 1,35,96,759/- 2,25,30,222/- Purchase value 76,77,779/- 1,30,83,298/- 2,07,49,077/- Difference 12,66,684/- 5,14,461/- 17,81,145/- 8.2 It is observed by this Court that admittedly the difference in the stamp duty value and the purchase value {as declared by the Assessee} of unit no.307 is of Rs. 5,14,461/- which is below than the amount equal to 5% of the consideration, as per exception carved out in the provisions of section 56(2) (x) (b) (B) (ii) and section 50(c) of the Act. Though the provisions of section 56(2)(x) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
