Mangat Rai Malik, Noida V. DCIT, Circle-2, Noida

ITA 1449/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0477 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Valuation report
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI SMC B ENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1449/DEL/2019 [A.Y 2010-11] MANGAT RAI MALIK VS. DCIT C/O AYK & ASSOCIATES, CAS CIRCLE-2 C-24, GROUND FLOOR, SECTOR-2, NOIDA NOIDA PAN NO.ADQPM6760L [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 12.09.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13. 09.2019 APPELLANT BY : SH. C.S. ANAND, ADVOCA TE RESPONDENT BY : SH. S. L. ANURAGI, SR . DR ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA , AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-3, NOIDA DATED 28.08.2018 PERTAINING TO A. Y. 2010-11. 2. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE GRIEVANCE OF THE AS SESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL BY T REATING IT AS A DEFECTIVE APPEAL. ON MERITS THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS TH AT THE ADDITION MADE U/S. 50C OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS OF THE VALUE ADOPTED FOR 2 THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY SHOULD BE DELETED AS THE AVO HAS VALUED THE PLOT AND THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VALUE IS LESS THAN 5%. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DU RING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE SOLD PLOT OF LAND AT SECTOR-46, NOIDA ON 10.07.2009 FOR RS.26 LACS. HOWEVER, THE S TAMP WAS PAID ON RS.37.42 LACS. 4. INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE AC T. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADOPTED THE TOTAL SALE CONSIDERAT ION AT RS.37.42 LACS AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.11.42 LACS. 5. THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT( A) BUT THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TREATIN G TO BE A DEFECTIVE APPEAL. 6. BEFORE ME THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED TH AT DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OBJECTION WAS RAISED TO REFER THE VALUATION OF THE SOLD PLOT TO THE VALUATI ON OFFICER. ON SUCH OBJECTION THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE A REFEREN CE TO THE VALUATION OFFICER, MEERUT U/S. 50C (II). SINCE THE VALUATION REPORT WAS NOT RECEIVED AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS GETT ING BARRED LIMITATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. IT IS THE SAY OF THE COUNSEL THAT A PROPER APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT FOR THE REASONS BEST KNOWN TO THE CIT(A) HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL AS DEFECTIVE. 7. PER CONTRA THE DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDING S OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. I HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE O RDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT PARA-4 OF HIS ORDER HAS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT MATTER WAS REFERRED TO T HE VALUATION 3 OFFICER BUT SINCE THE ASSESSMENT WAS GETTING BARRED BY LIMITATION HE DID NOT WAIT FOR THE VALUATION OFFICERS REPORT AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT. 9. I FIND THAT THE PROPER APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE T HE CIT(A) BUT THE CIT(A) IN HIS WISDOM DISMISSED IT AS A DEFECTIV E APPEAL. 10. BEFORE ME THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE VALUATION OFFICER HAS BEEN FILED WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE VALUE ESTIM ATED BY HIM AT RS.27 LACS AND THE VALUE DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE A T RS. 26 LACS HAS ONLY A DIFFERENCE OF RS.1 LAC WHICH DIFFERENCE IS ABOUT 3.8 PERCENT. 11. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY I REST ORE THE MATTER TO THE FILES OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERI NG THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE VALUATION OFFICER. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.09. 2019. SD/- [N.K. BILLAIYA] ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED: 13 SEPTEMBER, 2019 *NEHA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CITI 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI 4 DATE OF DICTATION 12.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 13.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 13.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 13.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 13.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/ PS 13.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WE BSITE OF ITAT 13.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 16.0 9.2019 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. THE DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRA R FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER