D.MARAGATHAM, MELUR V. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD-2(4), MADURAI

ITA 229/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1068 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital Gains

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय+ीमहावीरिसंह, उपा12एवं माननीय+ी मनोज कु मार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.229/Chny/2020 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2008-09) D. Maragatham No. 46B, R.C. Church Road, Melur – 625 016. बनाम/ V s . ITO Non Corporate Ward -2(4), Madurai. थायीलेखासं. /जीआइआरसं. /P AN / G I R N o . CE W P M - 2 8 8 6 - N (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None थ कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 27-09-2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12-10-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2008- 09arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai [CIT(A)] dated 06.11.2019in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3)r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 30.03.2015. The sole grievance of the assessee is ITA No.229/Chny/2020 - 2 - confirmation of certain addition of Rs.1.18 Lacs u/s 50C. There is a delay of 24 days in the appeal which stand condoned. 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for confirmation of impugned order. Havingconsidered relevant material on record, our adjudication would be as under. 3. The assessee sold vacant land area of 1344 Sq. Ft. for Rs.7.25 Lacs on 26.12.2007 but did not file return of income. Therefore, the case was reopened. The assessee submitted that the sale consideration was only Rs.1.95 Lacs. The valuation was referred to Ld. DVO who valued to property at Rs.7.25 Lacs. Accordingly, the same was adopted and capital gains of Rs.4.58 Lacs were computed. 4. During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that the guideline value as mentioned in sale deed was Rs.260/- per sq. ft. which was supported by certificate dated 30.03.2015 issued by Sub- Registrar,Melur. The assessee’s submissions were subjected to remand proceedings. The Ld. AO sent a letter to Sub-Registrar, Melur wherein the guideline value of Muniyandi Koli Street was mentioned as Rs.540/- per Sq. Ft. The Sub-Registrar, however, did not mention the exact location of the land. The Ld. AO drew an inference that as per registration deed, there is no mention of exact location of plot. Only the survey numbers and the boundaries have been mentioned. Considering the survey numbers, the guideline value would be Rs.106.60 per Sq. Ft. However, for Muniyandi Koli Street, the guideline value given by the Sub-Registrar was Rs.540/- per Sq. Ft. In the said scenario, Ld. AO proposed adoption of Rs.540/- per sq. ft. Accepting the same, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. ITA No.229/Chny/2020 - 3 - 5. From the perusal of remand report, it could be noted that the exact location of the land has not been given by Sub-Registrar. Further, going by the survey nos., the guideline value was much lower at Rs.106.06 per Sq. Ft. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the guideline value of Rs.260/- as certified by Sub-Registrar, Melur for assessee-specific property was to be accepted as the sale consideration for the purpose of computation of capital gains. The Ld. AO is directed to adopt sale consideration @Rs.260/- per Sq. Ft. and recompute the income of the assessee. The ground stand partly allowed. No other ground arises in the appeal. 6. The appeal stands partly allowed. Order pronounced on 12 th October, 2022. Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा12 /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखासद9 /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे+ई/ Chennai; िदनांक/ Dated : 12-10-2022 JPV JPVJPV JPV आदेशकीVितिलिपअ6ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु (अपील)/CIT(A)4. आयकरआयु /CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR6. गाड फाईल/GF