Smt. Ushaben J Patel, Vadodara V. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(5), Vadodara

ITA 154/AHD/2018

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Ushaben J Patel, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which upheld the assessment made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) regarding the short-term capital gains on the sale of a property for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was the valuation of the property, where the assessee argued that the Jantri value used by the tax authorities did not reflect the true market value due to various factors such as the presence of a high tension line and nearby slums, which were not considered by the lower authorities. The Tribunal found that the DVO's valuation, which the CIT(A) directed to be used, was appropriate and should replace the Jantri value previously considered.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299957 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 11 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 03-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-01-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 147; 143(3); 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I .T .A . No .1 54 /A h d / 20 18 ( A s se ss m e nt Y e a r : 20 11- 1 2 ) S mt. U s ha be n J Pa t e l 1 T u ls i D up le x, G o r w a , Va do dar a - 39 0 0 03 V s . I T O War d - 1 ( 2) ( 5 ) , V a do da r a [ P AN N o. C T LP P0 8 07 N ] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R. D a t e of H ea r i ng 04.01.2023 D a t e of P r o no u n ce me nt 11.01.2023 O R D E R The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-4, Vadodara on 22.10.2021 for A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 4, Vadodara [“the CIT(A)”] erred in fact and in law in holding that the report of District Valuation Officer (“DVO”) shall be binding on the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(5), Vadodara (“the AO”) as well as the Appellant. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in holding that the report of the DVO shall be binding on the AO and the Appellant despite there being no such provision in the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). 3. Your Appellant craves the right to add to or alter, amend, substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. The assessee is an individual has filed her return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 on 09.03.2015 declaring total income at Rs. 6,20,930/-. The assessment order under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act was finalized on 19.03.2015 determining total income of Rs. 44,44,998/- thereby making addition in respect of short-term capital gain under Section 50C of the Act. ITA No. 154/Ahd/2018 Smt. Ushaben J Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2011-12 - 2 - 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purpose 5. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite giving several notices and the same was properly acknowledge by the assessee and the AD card showing the signature of the assessee is there on the records of the Tribunal. Therefore, we are proceeding on the basis of the submissions made by the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) which are quoted in the respective orders. 6. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the CIT(A) in fact has given a relief to the assessee by directing the Assessing Officer to refer the valuation of the said property to the District Valuation Officer (in short “DVO”) and replace the figure of Jantri value with that of DVO as provided to the law. 7. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 8. Heard the Ld. D.R. and perused all the relevant material available on record. From the submissions of the assessee in Para 4 and sub paras thereafter the assessee submitted before the authorities that assessee while getting the sole transaction registered on 03.05.2010 Stamp Duty amounting to Rs. 9,89,020/- was paid and corresponding valuation of the land sold comes to Rs. 2,01,84,000/-. The rate of Stamp Duty during the relevant period was being charged at 4.90% of the sale consideration. In this case, 4.90% of Rs. 2,01,84,000/- happens to be 9,89,020/- which was already paid the CIT(A) has categorically observed that the assessee has shown lesser amount of ITA No. 154/Ahd/2018 Smt. Ushaben J Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2011-12 - 3 - consideration in the registered conveyance deed that the market value i.e. Jantri Value. Therefore, the value of the land as assessed by the stamp duty valuation authority, Baroda-4, Gorwa, is taken as full value of consideration as enunciated in the provisions of Section 50C of the Act. The CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer has not pointed out as to the valuation of the assessee at market value was incorrect. The observation of both the authorities was only to the extent that the Stamp Duty Valuation Authority should have been taken as full value of consideration. The assessee has given the explanation that various issues was traced like high tension line running through entry to be provided for adjacent plot of land and also the nearly area of the land that is covered by slums that is reduced the value of the land. These factors were taken into consideration while offering the market value that is Jantri Value by the assessee. Thus, the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A) has not considered these two aspects. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 11/01/2023 Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 11/01/2023 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/ Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबं धत आयकर आय ु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील!य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड' फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad