Anandkumar Mansukhlal Patel, Rajkot V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Rajkot

ITA 146/RJT/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7294 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RANJIT LALCHANDANI
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Fair market value; Valuation report
• Section: 143(3); 50C; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH , RAJKOT BEFORE: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND S H RI AMARJIT SINGH , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [CONDUCTED THROUGH E - COURT AT AHMEDABAD] SHRI ANANDKUMAR MANSUKHLAL PATEL, C/O. M/S. ANAND AGENCIES, DHEBARBHAI ROAD, OPP. MEHTA PETROL PUMP, RAJKOT - 360002 PAN: ACGPP8605G (APPE LLANT) VS THE ITO, WARD - 5(2), RAJKOT (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI PRAVEEN VERMA , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI RANJIT LALCHANDANI , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 0 3 - 07 - 2 019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 - 07 - 2 019 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - THI S ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08 , AR ISES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 3, RAKOT DATED 16 - 02 - 2018 , I N PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T A NO . 146 / RJT /20 18 A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 I.T.A NO. 146 /RJT /20 18 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI ANANDKUMAR MANSUKHLAL PATEL VS. ITO 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. THE CIT {A} ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO 1, TH E CIT {A} ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE DETERMINING THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS AT RS 317517 AS AGAINST RS 119286 DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THE FACT IN BRIEF IS THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 2,56,480/ - . SUBSEQU ENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED UNDER SCRUTINY BY ISSUING OF NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT ON 27 TH DECEMBER, 2013. THE CASE WAS REOPENED ON THE REASON THAT ASSESSE HAS NOT SHOW N LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN FROM S A L E OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AS PER THE PROVISION OF SE CTION 50C OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD AN OFFICE SPACE FOR S ALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 4 LACS, H OWEVER, THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY HAS ADOPTED THE VALUE OF THE SOLD PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY AT RS. 5,7 9,911/ - . THE ASS ESSEE HAS OBJECTED THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISPOSED THE OBJECTION BY A SPEAKING ORDER DATED 9 TH JUNE, 2014. DURING THE COURSE OF REOPENED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE FAIR VALUE OF THE SOLD PROPERTY WAS NOT MORE THAN AMOUNT OF SALE OF RS. 4 LAC RECEIVED FROM THE BUYER OF THE SAID PROPERTY. THE ASSESSEE HAS REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REFER THE VALUATION OF THE SOLD PROPERTY TO THE DISTRICT VALUATION OFFICER U/S. 50C( 2) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REFERRED THE MATTER TO THE DVO FOR DETERMINING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE IMPUGNED SOLD PROPERTY U/S. 50C(2) OF THE ACT. AS PER THE VALUATION REPORT RECEIVED FROM THE DVO, THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF T HE SOLD PROPERTY WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 5,51,000/ - . THE ASSESSE HAS OBJECTED THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE DVO ON T HE GROUND THAT HE HAS NOT CONSIDERED OTHER FACTORS LIKE AVERAGE SALE PRICE IN THE COMPARABLE CASES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT I.T.A NO. 146 /RJT /20 18 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI ANANDKUMAR MANSUKHLAL PATEL VS. ITO 3 ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSE STATING THAT VALUER HAS GIVEN AN ELABORATE VALUATION REPORT AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS FACTORS SUCH AS LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY, AMENITIES AVAILABLE AND QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION ETC. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT REGISTERED VALUER VA LUED THE SOLD PROPERTY AT RS. 5,51,000/ - WHICH WAS LESS THAN VALUE OF RS. 5,79,911/ - ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY . THEREFORE, THE SALE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY WAS ADOPTED AT RS. 5,51,000/ - AS AGAINST SALE VALUE OF RS. 4 LACS SHOWN BY THE ASSESS EE. 4. AGGRIEVED ASSESSE HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AFTER PERUSAL OF THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE OBSERVE THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT DISCLOSED THE SALE VALUE OF PROPERTY ACCORDING TO THE VALUE DETERMINED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY AS CONTEMPLATED U/S. 50C OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT IS JUSTIFIED. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR IN THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING REOPENING ASSESSMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE IS DISMISSED. 6. REGARDING SECTI ON GROUND OF APPEAL AGAINST DECISION OF LD. CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING THAT DETERMINATION OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AT RS. 3,17,517/ - AS AGAINST RS. 1,19,286/ - DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE, I T IS NOTICED THAT AS PER REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDING, THE MATTER WAS REFERRED U/S. 50C(2) OF THE ACT TO THE VALUATION OFFICER FOR DETERMINING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE SOLD PROPERTY. A S PER VALUATION I.T.A NO. 146 /RJT /20 18 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI ANANDKUMAR MANSUKHLAL PATEL VS. ITO 4 REPORT DATED 20 TH AUGUST, 2014, THE VALUATION OFFICER HAS DETERMINED THE FAIR MARKE T VALUE OF THE SOLD PROPERTY AT RS. 5,51,000/ - . AFTER PERUSAL OF THE REPORT , WE OBSERVE THAT VALUATION OFFICER HAS CONSIDERED VARIOUS FACTORS I.E. SIZE, SHAPE, LOCATION SITUATION, TIME GAP, FLOOR DISPOSITION, COMMERCIAL UTILITY ETC. BEFORE COMPUTING THE F AIR MARKET VALUE OF THE SOLD PROPERTY IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS ON 15 JAN, 2007 AT RS. 10586 PER SQ. MT. W E DO NOT FIND ANY RELEVANCY IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER CONSIDERING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 50C(3) OF THE ACT THAT IN CASE THE VALUE AS CERTAINED BY THE VALUATION OFFICER U/S. 50C(2) OF THE ACT EXCEED S THE VALUE OF ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY IN SUCH SITUATION THE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VAL U AT ION AUTHORITY SHALL BE TAKEN AS THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATIO N. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE SOLD PROPERTY DETERMINED BY THE VALUATION OFFICER U/S. 50C(2) OF THE ACT WAS LESS THAN THE VALUE OF RS. 5 , 79 , 911/ - ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VA L UATION FOR THE PU RPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY, T HEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE DECISION OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN ADOPTING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS DETERMINED BY THE VALUATION OFFICER U/S. 50C(2 ) OF THE ACT AS REQUESTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OUR T ON 15 - 07 - 201 9 SD/ - SD/ - (MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABA D : DATED 15 /07 /201 9 I.T.A NO. 146 /RJT /20 18 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI ANANDKUMAR MANSUKHLAL PATEL VS. ITO 5 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT