ITO, New Delhi V. Smt. Poonam Chopra, New Delhi

ITA 4406/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5529 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDER PAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Fair market value; Valuation report
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4406/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 50(4), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS. POONAM CHOPRA, B - 65/3, NARAINA INDL. AREA, NEW DELHI PAN: AAEPC 3045R (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. SURENDER PAL, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SH. SATYA JEET GOEL, ADVOCATE ORDER PER B.R.R. KUMAR, A.M.: THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 02.06.2016 OF LD. CIT(A)-17, NEW DELHI ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,16,42,250/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LON G TERM CAPITAL GAIN, WHEN THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS MORE THAN THE SALE CONSIDERATION RECORDED IN THE AGREEMENT TO SELL. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF T HE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,16,42,250/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN WHEN THE A.O. HAS CORRECTLY TAKEN THE FAIR MARKET V ALUE AS SALE DATE OF HEARING 03.06.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03 .06.2019 ITA NO. 4406/DEL/2016 2 CONSIDERATION IN ABSENCE OF STAMP DUTY VALUATION U/ S. 50C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. THE MOOT ISSUE INVOLVED IS WHETHER THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 50C ARE APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD T HE PROPERTY IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND HAS SHOWN CAPITAL GAINS IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON RECEIPT OF FULL AND FINAL PAYMENTS TOWAR DS THE CONSIDERATION. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(47), THE ASSESSING OFFI CER DEEMED IT TO BE TRANSFER DURING THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE PROPERTY W AS REFERRED TO THE VALUATION OFFICER AND THE VALUATION REPORT HAS BEEN OBTAINED. BASED ON THE VALUATION REPORT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE AD DITION IN THE CURRENT YEAR, I.E., 2007-08. WE FIND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTI ON 50C CAME INTO EXISTENCE VIDE NOTIFICATION DATED 18.07.2007. THEREFORE, IT I S NOT APPLICABLE TO THE YEAR IN QUESTION. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS HEREBY DELETED AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS UPHELD. 4. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/06/2019. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 03 JUNE, 2019 *AKS*