MEENA TAMBI, Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 242/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2086 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Fair market value
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 242/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 MEENA TAMBI, D-50, TAMBI KUNJ, HATHI BABU MARG, BANIPARK, JAIPUR (RAJ). CUKE VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAKPT 2090 H VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 243/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 KAVITA TAMBI, D-50, TAMBI KUNJ, HATHI BABU MARG, BANIPARK, JAIPUR (RAJ). CUKE VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AATPT 9521 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MUKESH KHANDELWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 28/08/2017 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31/08/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. BOTH ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY TWO DIFFERENT ASSESSE ES EMANATES FROM THE TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAI PUR DATED 25/01/2017 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. ITA 242 & 243/JP/2017_ MEENA TAMBI VS. ACIT 2 2. BOTH THE APPEALS ARE BEING HEARD TOGETHER AND FO R THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY, A COMMON ORDER IS BEING PA SSED. 3. IN BOTH THE APPEALS, THERE IS COMMON ISSUE INVOL VED, WHICH IS AGAINST SUSTAINING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE SALE CONSIDERATION DECLARED IN THE REGISTERED DEED AND V ALUE ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY VALUATION BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY. 4. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LD AR OF THE ASSES SEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT EACH OF THESE ASSESSEES WERE 3/10 TH SHARE HOLDERS OF A PIECE OF LAND, WHICH WAS SOLD AT A SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 2.81 CR ORES. BOTH OF THESE ASSESSEES RECEIVED RS. 84.30 LACS EACH. THE STAMP VA LUATION AUTHORITY VALUED THE SAID PROPERTY AT RS. 3,30,48,124/-. THE A SSESSING OFFICER INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED TO REFER TH E MATTER FOR VALUATION AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C(2) OF THE ACT. THE LD AR SUBMITTED THEIR REQUEST WAS NOT ACCEPTED. SINCE THE ASSESSEE WANTED T O CHALLENGE THE VALUATION MADE BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY IN TERM S OF SECTION 50C(2) OF THE ACT THEN ASSESSING OFFICER IS BOUND BY LAW TO RE FER THE MATTER TO THE VALUATION OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FAILED TO D O SO. LD. AR PLEADED TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO A.O. FOR DOING NEEDFUL. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO D ID NOT REFER THE ISSUE TO THE VALUATION OFFICER THEREFORE, IN THE IN TEREST OF JUSTICE AND ITA 242 & 243/JP/2017_ MEENA TAMBI VS. ACIT 3 EQUITY AND IN COMPLIANCE OF THE LEGAL POSITION, I F IND IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER WITH DIRECTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL REFER THE MATTER TO THE DISTRICT VALUATION OFFICER TO ASCERTAIN THE FAIR MARKET VALUE ON THE DATE OF TRANSFER. THE ASSESSEES SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO SUBMIT NECESSARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THEIR CLAIM WITH REGARD TO VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AT FAIR MAR KET VALUE ON THE DATE OF TRANSFER. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/08/2017. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 31 ST AUGUST, 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANTS- (I) SMT. MEENA TAMBI, JAIPUR & (II) SMT. KAVITA TAMBI, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 242 & 243/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR