ITO, Jaipur V. SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL, Jaipur

ITA 412/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 41223114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 30-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 412/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE I.T.O. WARD 1(4), JAIPUR CUKE VS. SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL, 8/33, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AHMPA 8158 N VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY MALIK, (ADDL.CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL, (C.A.) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 24/11/2014 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/01/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24/02/2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR F OR A.Y. 2008-09. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST DELETING THE AD DITION OF RS. 25,10,000/- AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON THE SALE OF PROPERTY AT G-103, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, BAGRU. ITA 412/JP/2012_ ITO VS SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL 2 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD SOLD PROPERTY SITUATED AT G-103, RIICO INDUSTRIAL A REA, BAGRU ON 01/5/2007. THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY HAD VALUED THE PROPERTY AT RS. 8,25,000/- FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES. BUT THE SA LE AMOUNT REFLECTED IN AIR INFORMATION ON RECORD WAS RS. 33,35,000/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AGAIN VERIFIED THIS INFORMATION FROM THE STAMP VALU ATION AUTHORITY, WHO HAD CONFIRMED THE REVALUATION DONE BY THE AUTHORITY AT RS. 33,35,000/-. THE A.O. GAVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON THIS ISSUE. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM THAT THE LAND WAS SOLD ON 01/5/2007 WITH CONSIDERATION OF RS. 8,25,000/- AND THE DLC VAL UE WAS RS. 6,07,500/- AT THAT TIME. THE INSPECTION CARRIED OUT BY THE STAMP AUTHORITY ON 11/2/2008 AFTER A LAPSE OF MORE THAN N INE MONTHS AND NOTICE FOR DEMAND RAISED ON 11/07/2009, WHICH WAS ALS O ALMOST 16 MONTH AFTER INSPECTION. THE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY HA D CONSTRUCTED THE BUILDING, WHICH HAD BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE HANDS OF APPELLANT DURING THE INSPECTION. THE INDUSTRIAL PLOT OF RIICO, THE D EVELOPMENT RATE OF RIICO HAD TAKEN AS DLC RATE FOR THE PURPOSES OF STA MPING AND VALUATION PURPOSES, WHICH HAD BEEN TAKEN @ 405 PER S Q.MTS. AND TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION WAS RS. 6,07,500/- AS PER DLC VA LUE. THE DLC RATE EVEN DATE OF REPLY I.E. 15/12/2010 OF RIICO PLOT WAS 1650/-. WHEREAS THE STAMP AUTHORITY HAD TAKEN DLC RATE AS ON 01/5/2 007 @ 2160 PER ITA 412/JP/2012_ ITO VS SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL 3 SQ.MTR. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES REPLY, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AS PER SECTION 50C(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) HAD ASSESSED CAPITAL GAIN ON THE BASIS OF VALU E TAKEN AT RS. 33,35,000/- BY THE STAMP AUTHORITY. ACCORDINGLY, SH ORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN WAS CALCULATED AT RS. 27,41,010/-. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT( A), WHO HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL FULLY BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE SUBMISSION OF THE A.O. IN HIS REPORT BECAUSE TO BEGIN WITH THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FILED AN Y ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. GIVEN THE INCONSISTENCY IN THE VALUATION OF THE SAID LAND SHE HAD REQUESTED UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 50C(2) FOR THE MATTER TO BE REFERRED TO THE DEPARTMENTAL VALUATION OFFICER. AS PER THIS REPORT THE VALUE OF THE LAND WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 8,10,000/-. REGARDING THE OBSERVATION OF THE A.O. THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE K EPT PENDING TILL THE FINALIZATION OF THE VALUE OF THE LAND BY THE ADDITI ONAL COLLECTOR (STAMPS), JAIPUR. IT IS SEEN THAT THE VALUE OF THE LAND WAS RE VISED VIDE AN ORDER DATED 08/7/2009 AT RS. 33,35,000/-. THE MATTER HAS B EEN UNDER LITIGATION IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR (ST AMPS), JAIPUR SINCE THEN. THERE APPEARS TO BE NO JUSTIFICATION IN KEEPING THE APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, PENDING IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT PARTICULARLY AS THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PROVIDES F OR REVISION OF THE VALUE OF LAND AS DETERMINED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY U/S 155(15). AS AND WHEN THE VALUE IS DECIDED BY THE ADD ITIONAL COLLECTOR (STAMPS) THE A.O. MAY RECTIFY THE VALUE OF LAND AS PER SECTION 155(15) ITA 412/JP/2012_ ITO VS SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL 4 READ WITH SECTION 50C. AS ON DATE, THE SALE RECEIPT SHOWN BY THE APPELLANT AT RS. 8,25,000/- ON TRANSFER OF THE LAND IS MORE THAN THAT DETERMINED BY THE DVO AT RS. 8,10,000/- U/S 50C(2) AND SO DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION THE VALUE OF LAND S OLD BY THE ASSESSEE IS TAKEN AT RS. 8,25,000/- U/S 50C(3) AND THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS. 25,10,000/- IS DELETED. 4. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LEARNE D D.R. ARGUED VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE F INDING GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LEARNED D.R. HAS NOT CONTROVERTED THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). SHE HAS GI VEN DETAILED FINDINGS ON PAGE NO. 5 AND 6 OF HER ORDER AND CONCLUDED THAT EVEN SUBSEQUENT SECOND SALE WAS TAKEN BY THE STAMP AUTHORITY @ 1650 P ER SQ.MTR. WHEREAS DLC RATE REVALUED BY THE STAMP AUTHORITY IN ASSESSEES CASE @ 2160 PER SQ.MTR., WHICH HAS BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE T HE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR (STAMP), JAIPUR AND MATTER IS PENDING BEF ORE HIM. AS PER SECTION 50C(2), THE DVO HAD ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE CONCERNED PROPERTY AT RS. 8,10,000/-. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICA TION IN APPLYING SALE CONSIDERATION AT RS. 33,35,000/-. IF THE LEARNED C IT(A)S OBSERVATION IS ITA 412/JP/2012_ ITO VS SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL 5 THAT IF ANY VARIATION IN VALUATION CAME ON ACCOUNT OF FINAL DECISION OF ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR (STAMP), CAN BE RECTIFIED U/S 155(15) WITHIN FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR, IN WHICH TH E ORDER REVISING THE VALUE WAS PASSED IN APPEAL OR REVISION OR REFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/01/2015. SD/- SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH VH-VKJ-EHUK (R.P.TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 16 TH JANUARY, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE ITO, WARD 1(4), JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- SMT. ANJANA AGARWAL. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR. 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT, JAIPUR 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 412/JP/2012) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR