HEMANT MARDA, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 2, Churu, Rajasthan

ITA 285/JPR/2000

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5461 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 year(s) 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2000
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K SONOWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R CHOWDHURY
• Keywords: Fair market value
• Section: 54B

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : KOLKATA () BEFORE . . . . . . . . , , , , !'# !'# !'# !'# /AND . .. . . .. .' '' ' , $ [BEFORE HONBLE SRI D. K. TYAGI, JM & HONBLE SRI C. D. RAO, AM] #% #% #% #% / I.T.A NO. 285(A)/JP/2000 &'( ')* &'( ')* &'( ')* &'( ')*/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996-97 SHRI HEMANT MARDA, CHURU -VS- INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-2, CHURU (,- / APPELLANT ) (.,-/ RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT: SRI R. CHOWDHURY FOR THE RESPONDENT : SRI D. K. SONOWAL / / ORDER PER D. K. TYAGI, JM ( . . . . . . . . , , , , ) THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), RAJASTHAN-III, JAIPUR DATED 24.02.2000/9.3.2000 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN ADOPTING THE PRICE OF THE LAND DECLARED IN WEALTH T AX RETURN IN DISREGARD OF THE COMPARABLE SALE INSTANCE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM BEING THE SALE REGISTERED AT CHURU OF COMPARABLE LAND AT RS.15,520/- PER BIGHA ON 13.6.86 . 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN OVERLOOKING THE PRO POSITION THAT THE VALUE OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN IS NOT R ELEVANT AS SUCH VALUE UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT AND THE RULES FRAMED THEREUNDER IS A RTIFICIAL AND NOT RELATED TO MARKET REALITY. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING THE BE NEFIT OF SECTION 54B EVEN THOUGH THE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT IN THE SAID PROVISIONS ARE SAT ISFIED. 4. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ACT IN ACCORDANCE WI TH LAW IN ARRIVING AT THE CONCLUSION THAT THE LAND HAD NOT BEEN USED BY THE ASSESEE FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES BEFORE THE DATE OF SALE. 5. THAT THE CONCLUSION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS CONTRAR Y TO AND INCONSISTENT WITH THE FACTS ON THE PAST RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE. 6. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BEFORE HIM IN PROOF OF PURCHASE OF AGRICUL TURAL LAND AT VILLAGE MOUJA GUNI, RAJARHAT, DO NOT CONSTITUTE DOCUMENTS OF PROOF OF O WNERSHIP OF THE LAND. 2 7. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DIRECTED THE ASS ESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 54B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN AS MANY AS SEVEN G ROUNDS OF APPEAL, BUT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ONLY PRESSED GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2. THEREFORE, GROUND NOS. 3 TO 7 ARE DISMISSED BEING NOT PRESSED. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS IN RESPECT OF GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2 ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOLD CERTAIN LAND AT CHURU FOR RS.12 LAKHS AND FOR THE P URPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAINS, THE MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.81, WAS SHOWN AT RS. 1 LAC. THE BASIS FOR THIS VALUATION WAS ASKED FOR BUT A GENERAL REPLY WAS GIV EN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, NOTED THAT THE VALUE OF THIS LAND IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN WAS RS.16,000/- AND HE ADOPTED THE SAME MARKET VALUE. IN APPEAL, TH E LD. CIT(A) APPROVED THE VALUE AS ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. BEING FURTHER AG GRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE ADOPTED A FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1. 4.1981 AT RS.4000/- PER BIGHA. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO VALUATION OF LAND AT CHURU BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADOPTED THE VALUE AS SHOWN IN THE W.T. RETURN FILED BY ASSESEES FATHER, WHICH IS NOT REASONABLE AND FAIR. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ONE OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS REGISTERED AT CHURU ON 13.6.86 AT RS.15,520/- PER BIGHA AND ON THIS BASIS, THE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE IS FAIR AND PROPER. HE ALSO CONTENDED THA T FOR CAPITAL GAIN PURPOSES MARKET VALUE SHOULD BE TAKEN BUT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TAKEN THE VALUE OF WEALTH TAX RETURN AS SHOWN BY ASSESSEES FATHER. HE ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE REVENUE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS REGISTERED AT CHURU ON 13.8.1986 AT RS.15,520/- PER BIGHA. WITHOUT APPRECIATING THIS FACT, THE LOWER A UTHORITIES HAVE SIMPLY TAKEN THE VALUE AS ADOPTED BY ASSESSEES FATHER IN HIS WEALTH TAX R ETURN, WHICH IS UNJUSTIFIED AND IMPROPER. HE ALSO RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAW S : I) MAHMUDABAD PROPERTIES (P) LTD. VS. CIT (1972) 85 ITR 500 (CAL), II) J. N. BOSE VS. CIT (1976) 104 ITR 83. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED BEFORE THE BENCH TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 3 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDE RS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND PRAYED BEFORE THE BENCH TO CONFIRM THE SAME. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, CAREFULLY P ERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE CASE LAWS CITED BY THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE CALCULATING THE CAPITAL GAI NS, ADOPTED THE MARKET VALUE OF LAND AT RS.16,000/- WHICH WAS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEES FA THER IN HIS WEALTH TAX RETURN WHILE THE ASSESEE HAS TAKEN THIS VALUE AT RS.4,000/- PER BIGHA ON THE BASIS OF SALE TRANSACTION AT CHURU ON 13.8.1986 @ RS.15,520/- PER BIGHA. SINCE THIS TRANSACTION HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTE BY THE REVENUE, THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PRO PERTY ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS ON 1.4.1981 @ RS.4,000/- PER BIGHA APPEARS TO BE REASO NABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS, THEREFORE, DIRECTED TO ACCEPT THIS VALUATION WHILE CALCULATING THE CAPITAL GAINS. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE, THEREFORE, A LLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESEE IS ALLO WED IN PART 8. THE ORDER IS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.1 2.10 SD/- SD/- . .. . . .. .' '' ' , $ . . , (C. D. RAO) (D. K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ( $ $ $ $) )) ) DATED : 16TH DECEMBER, 2010 '01 &'23 &4' JD.(SR.P.S.) / 5 .&&6 76)8- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . ,- / APPELLANT SHRI HEMANT MARDA, MARDA HOUSE, 102, C.I .T. ROAD, SCH.VIM, KOLKATA-54 2 .,- / RESPONDENT, ITO, WARD-2, CHURU 3 . &/' / THE CIT, 4 . &/' ( )/ THE CIT(A), 5 . '?& .&' / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA 6 .&/ TRUE COPY, /'@/ BY ORDER, A #3 /DEPUTY REGISTRAR .