ITO 19(3)(1), MUMBAI V. ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVAV, MUMBAI

ITA 5411/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2087 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 28-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR DARIS SUMAN RATNAM
• Assessee Lawyers: A P SINHA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital asset; Earning of tax free income; Fair market value; Valuation report
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUM BAI , BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04) INCOME TAX OFFICER - 19(3)(1) /APPELLANT ROOM NO. 307, 3RD FLOOR PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG MUMBAI 400012 VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA RESPONDENT 301, KONARK CLASSIC, HILL ROAD OPP. HOLY FAMILY HOSPITAL BANDRA (W), MUMBAI 400050 PAN - AAJPS2529R APPELLANT BY: DR. DARIS SUMAN RATNAM / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI A.P. SINHA DATE OF HEARING : 19.11.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.11.2015 O R D E R PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE O RDER OF CIT(A) ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - (1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE SALE PRICE AT RS.5,40,000/- SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING THE CAPITAL GAIN WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS 2 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 AS T HE STAMP DUTY AUTHORITIES AND THE DVO HAS DETERMINED THE MAR KET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT RS.19,64,000/- AND RS.22,13,000/- RESPECTIVELY AND UNDER THE PROVISION OF LAW THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THE LD. CIT(A) TO PL ACE RELIANCE ON A VALUATION REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASS ESSEE. 2. ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN LOSS FROM BUSINESS AT ` 3,106/- AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AT ` 68,146/-. ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN EXEMPT INCOME TO THE TUNE OF ` 7,45,756/-. ON PERUSAL OF CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF ASSESS EE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS CREDITED AN AMOUNT OF ` 5,40,000/- BEING AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM SALE OF ANCES TRAL PROPERTY. ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH DETAILS OF SUCH SALE AND FURNISH AND EXPLANATION AS TO WHY NO CAPITAL GAIN WAS OFFERED T O TAX. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME ASSESSEE FURNISHED COMPUTATION OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF ANCESTRAL PROPERTY WHICH IS AS UNDER: - COMPUTATION OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS SHARE OF MR. ASHOK SRIVASTAVA 4,70,000 (SOLD ON 10.09.2002) LESS: MARKET VALUE AS ON 1.4.1981 (APP. OF 2/5 TH SHARE) = 1,10,000/- INDEXED COST = ` 1,10,000/- X 447/100 4,91,700 CAPITAL GAIN (LOSS) 21,700 3. HOWEVER, ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SALE CONSIDERATION OF ` 4,70,000/- WHEREAS HE HAS RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF ` 5,40,000/- TOWARDS SALE OF SUCH PROPERTY. THEREFORE THE ABOVE COMPUTATION WAS INCORRECT. FURTHER, ON PERUSAL OF A GREEMENT OF SALE, 3 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA IT WAS FOUND BY ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE MARKET V ALUE OF THE SAID PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY WAS DETERMIN ED AT ` 19,64,000/- BY THE STAMP VALUATION OFFICER. ASSESSI NG OFFICER INVOKED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. HE O BSERVED THAT IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT TH E CONSIDERATION OF THE SAID PROPERTY AT LAKHIMPUR, KHERI, U.P. FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAINS IS DEEMED TO BE ` 19,64,000/-. THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN FROM SALE OF SUCH PROPERTY WAS CO MPUTED ACCORDINGLY. 4. THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE A UTHORITY. IN THIS CASE THE THEN CIT(A DIRECTED ASSESSING OFFICER TO REFER THE MATTER TO DVO FOR ASCERTAINING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF TH E PROPERTY. THE DVO SUBMITTED HIS REPORT VIDE ORDER DATED 7.12.2009 WHEREIN THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS ON 28.08.2002 WAS E STIMATED AT ` 22,13,000/-. THEREAFTER ASSESSING OFFICER SUBMITTED HIS REMAND REPORT WHICH READS AS UNDER: - IN THIS CASE, IT WAS OBSERVED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED HIS CAPI TAL ACCOUNT WITH AN AMOUNT OF RS. 5,40,000/- TOWARDS THE SALE O F HIS ANCESTRAL PROPERTY AND DECLARED A LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS THEREFROM OF RS.21,700/- FOR HIS SHARE AS UNDER:- SHARE OF MR. ASHOK SRIVASTAVA - RS.4,70,000 (SOLD ON 10.09.2002) LESS: MARKET VALUE AS ON 01/04/1981 (APP. OF 2/5 TH SHARE) = 1,10,000/- 4 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA INDEXED COST = ` 1,10,000/- X 447/100 RS.4,91,700 CAPITAL LOSS (-) RS.21,700 THE ASSESSEE WAS, THEREFORE, ASKED TO FILE THE DETA ILS OF THE SAME WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. ON PERUSAL O F DETAILS FILED, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD T HE PROPERTY BEING LAND SITUATED AT MELA ROAD, CITY LAKHIMPUR, P ARGANA AND DISTRICT KHIRI, UTTAR PRADESH FOR HIS 2/5TH SHARE O N 10.09.2002 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.5,40,000/-. HOWEVER, ON PERUS AL OF AGREEMENT FOR SALE, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITIES HAVE ADOPTED THE VALUE OF THE SAID PROP ERTY AT RS. 19,64,000/-. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C OF THE I.T ACT, 19 61 APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 'WHERE THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER B: AN ASSESSEE OF A CAPITAL ASSET, BEING LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTEE OR ASSESSED BY AN AUTHORITY OF A STAT E GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TR ANSFER, THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL FOR THE PURPOSES OF SEC. 48 BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RE CEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF SUCH TRANSFER. THE SECTION 50C WAS 'INSERTED BY FINANCE ACT, 2002, WITH EFFECT FROM 1.04.2003 WITH A VIEW TO TACKLE UNACCOUNTED IN COME BY THE PRACTICE OF UNDERSTATEMENT OF CONSIDERATION IN ACQU ISITION OF PROPERTY. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES HAS ALS O ISSUED A CIRCULAR (CIRCULAR NO. 8/2002 DT. 27/08/2002) ON TH E SUBJECT OF SEC. 50C - 'IT PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE CONSIDERATIO N DECLARED TO BE RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER, THE VALUE S O ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF TH E CONSIDERATION AND CAPITAL GAINS SHALL BE COMPUTED ACCORDINGLY UND ER SEC. 48 OF THE I T ACT.' IN THIS CASE THE SUB-REGISTRAR BANDRA, FOR THE PURP OSE OF STAMP DUTY VALUATION, HAD DETERMINED THE MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND AT RS.19,64,000/- AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE LOCATION OF THE LAND AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. ACCORDINGLY, THE VAL UE OF THE LAND SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED AT RS.19,64,000 /- IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 50C OF THE I T ACT 1961 AND 5 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF THE ASSESSEE ON SALE OF THE PROPERTY WAS WORKED OUT AT RS.14,72,300/-. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THE SAID ADDITION. DURING THE CO URSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED T HAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INVOKED THE PROVISION OF SECTION 5OC WI THOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO HIM TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY ME. THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE H IS LETTER DATED 25.05.2007, HAS THEREFORE DIRECTED ASSESSING OFFICE R TO SUBMIT HIS REPORT AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO TH E ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN HIS CASE AND PRODUCE EVIDENCE OF SALE CONSI DERATION RECEIVED BY HIM AND AFTER ASCERTAINING THE FAIR MAR KET VALUE BY THE DVO. 4. ACCORDINGLY, VIDE THIS OFFICE LETTER DATED 30.03.20 09, THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THE DVO, VALUATION CELL, I. T. DEPA RTMENT, MUMBAI FOR ASCERTAINING MARKET VALUE OF THE ASSESSE E'S PROPERTY BEING LAND ADMEASURING 3200 S.FT. ALONG WITH STRUCT URE THEREON SITUATED AT MELA ROAD, CITY LAKHIMPUR, PARGANA AND DISTRICT KHIRI, UTTAR PRADESH FOR THE ASSESSEE'S SHARE AS ON 28.08. 2002. THE DVO, MUMBAI, HAS FORWARDED THE MATTER TO THE SUPERI NTENDENT ENGINEER (VALUATION), IT DEPARTMENT. KANPUR, FOR AS CERTAINING MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS THE SAME WAS SITUAT ED IN THE DISTRICT KHIRI UTTAR PRADESH. ACCORDINGLY, THE VALU ATION REPORT WAS RECEIVED FROM THEM VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 7. 12.200 9 WHEREIN THE 'FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS ON 28.08.2002 WAS ESTIMATED AT RS.22,13,000/-. HENCE VIDE THIS OFFICE LETTER DATED 07.07.2010), THE FACT WAS INFORMED TO THE ASSESSEE AND HE WAS REQUESTED TO ATTEND AND PRESENT HIS CASE BY 14.07.2 010 AT 3.00 P.M. 5. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, NOBODY ATTENDED ON THE APP OINTED DATE NOR FILED ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION OR SEEK ANY A DJOURNMENT. LATER ON, M/S J. J. MEHRA & CO, VIDE THEIR LETTER D T. 16.09.2010 FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON 01.10.2010, HAS SOUGHT ADJO URNMENT IN THE MATTER. NOBODY ATTENDED ON THE APPOINTED DATE NOR F ILED ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION OR SEEK ADJOURNMENT. LATER ON, M /S. BHUTTA SHAH & CO. VIDE THEIR LETTER DATED 12.02.2011 RECEI VED IN THIS OFFICE ON 15.02.2011, SUBMITTED AS UNDER: - WE ENCLOSE HEREWITH TWO COPIES OF VALUATION REPORT FROM GUPTA ASSOCIATES (ENGINEERS, ARCHITECT, VALUERS AND CONTR ACTOR) DATED 09.11.2010 OF PROPERTY AT MELA ROAD, CITY LAKHIMPUR , KHERI, 6 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA DISTT. KHERI (UP). THE VALUATION REPORT NO IS 899/A VO/KKO/2009- 10/108 DATED 26.10.2009. THE VALUATION AS PER THE R EPORT IS RS.5,40,0001- IT WAS OBTAINED DURING THE REMAND PRO CEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A)-19. IT IS TO B E FORWARDED TO THE VALUATION OFFICER AT LUCKNOW. IT IS A TECHNICAL MATTER AND SAME CAN BE EXPLAINED BY TECHNICAL OFFICE IN THIS R EGARD. IT WILL HELP HIM IN COMPARING THE VALUE. KINDLY THE PLACE T HE ABOVE ON YOUR RECORD AND FORWARD THE SAME AS MAY BE REQUIRED . 6. THE SUBMISSION MADE BY AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BE EN DULY CONSIDERED BUT NOT ACCEPTABLE. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS CASE HAS SOLD THE PROPERTY BEING LAND SITUATED AT MELA ROAD, CITY LAKHIMPUR, PARGANA AND DISTRICT KHIRI, UTTAR PRADESH, FOR HIS 2/5TH SHARE FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.5,40,000/-. HOWEVER, THE SUB RE GISTRAR BANDRA, FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY VALUATION, HA D DETERMINED THE MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND AT RS.19,64,000/- AFTE R TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE LOCATION OF THE LAND AND THE SURR OUNDING AREA. FURTHER, AS PER DIRECTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) , THE M ATTER OF VALUATION WAS REFERRED TO THE DVO TO ASCERTAIN THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE SAID LAND AND ACCORDINGLY THEY HAVE AS CERTAINED THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND AT RS.22,13,000/-. WITHOUT INSISTING, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HIS OW N HAS FILED A VALUATION REPORT FROM GUPTA ASSOCIATES SHOWING THE VALUE OF THE SAID PROPERTY AT RS.5,40,000/- THE AMOUNT EQUIVALEN T TO VALUE OF SALE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE ABOVE, IT COUL D BE EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS TRYING TO SHOW THE VALUE OF TH E LAND AT RS.5,40,000/- FOR HIS OWN BENEFIT AS AGAINST RS.19, 64,000/- DETERMINED BY THE STAMP DUTY AUTHORITY AND RS.22,13 ,000/- BY THE DVO, LUCKNOW. 7. IN VIEW OF THE DISCUSSION MADE HEREIN ABOVE, IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. IN THIS BACKGROUND THE CONCERNED ADDL.CIT HAS REQUE STED THAT THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY MAY BE ACCEPTED AT ` 22,13,000/- AS DETERMINED BY THE DVO, LUCKNOW. ON THE OTHER HAND, DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE RECEIVED 2/5 TH SHARE IN HIS ANCESTRAL 7 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA PROPERTY AMOUNTING TO ` 5,40,000/- SITUATED AT MELA ROAD, CITY LAKHIMPUR, PARGANA AND DISTRICT KHIRI, UTTAR PRADES H. THE PROPERTY WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE GRANDFATHER OF ASSESSEE IN T HE YEAR 1918. THE PROPERTY WAS OCCUPIED BY SEVERAL VERY OLD TENAN TS. NOBODY WAS WILLING TO BUY THE PROPERTY AS IT WAS OCCUPIED BY S O MANY TENANTS. ASSESSEE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN. THE LD. AUTHORIZED RE PRESENTATIVE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE DVO WORKED OUT THE VALUE OF PROPERTY AT ` 22,13,000/- AS OPPOSED TO THE AGREEMENT VALUE OF ` 5,40,000/- WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FOLLOWING DRAW BACKS OF THE PROPERTY:- 1. THE PROPERTY WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1918. 2. THE PROPERTY IS OCCUPIED BY LARGE NUMBER OF VER Y OLD TENANTS. 3. IT WAS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO GET THE PROPERTY VACATED. 4. THE DVO WORKED OUT THE VALUE AS IF IT IS A VACA NT PROPERTY. 5. THERE IS NO PROPER APPROACH ROAD FOR THE PROPER TY UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5. IN ADDITION THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT 1/5 TH PORTION OF THE SAME PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED BY SHAR VAN KUMAR AGARWAL FOR A CONSIDERATION OF ` 2,00,000/- IN THE YEAR 2002. COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE PURCHASER WAS FILED BEFORE CIT (A). IN THIS BACKGROUND THE CIT(A), HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBMIS SIONS OF THE ASSESSEE GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS B EEN OPPOSED BEFORE US, INTER ALIA, SUBMITTING THAT ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING 8 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE SALE PRICE AT RS.5,40,000/- SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING THE CAPITAL G AIN WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AS RIGHTLY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT AS THE STA MP DUTY AUTHORITIES AND THE DVO HAS DETERMINED THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT RS.19,64,000/- AND RS.22,13,000/- RESPECTIVELY AND UNDER THE PROVISION OF LAW THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THE CIT(A) TO PLACE RELIANCE ON A VALUATION REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASS ESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATER IAL ON RECORD WE FIND THAT AS PER SUB SECTION (3) OF SUB SECTION 50C IF THE VALUATION DONE BY THE DVO EXCEEDS THE VALUE DETERMI NED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY THEN THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITIES SHALL BE TAKEN TO BE VA LUED AS FULL VALUE. THEREFORE, IT WAS NOT CORRECT ON THE PART OF THE CO NCERNED ADDL. CIT TO REQUEST THAT THE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE DVO SHOULD BE ADOPTED BECAUSE THE SAME EXCEEDS THE VALUE AS PER THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITIES. EVEN THE VALUATION DONE BY THE DVO WAS FOUND NOT CORRECT. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. NEW DELHI CONSTRUCT ION CO., REPORTED 9 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA IN (1980) 123 ITR 0068 (DELHI), IT WAS HELD THAT OL D BUILDINGS WHICH ARE OCCUPIED BY SEVERAL TENANTS SHOULD BE VALUED BY RENT CAPITALIZATION METHOD AND NOT BY LAND AND BUILDING METHOD. THE REGISTERED VALUER WHOSE REPORT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE HAS WORKED OUT THE VALUE OF THE BUILDING ON RENT CAPITA LIZATION METHOD WHICH SEEMS TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD TO VALUE SUCH BUILDING. ASSISTANT VALUATION OFFICER HAS APPLIED THE LAND AN D BUILDING METHOD AND ESTIMATED THE COST OF THE PROPERTY AT ` 22,13,000/-. HE HAS NOT CITED ANY COMPARABLE CASES FOR APPLYING THE RATE OF ` 7,440/-. THE METHODOLOGY ADOPTED BY THE ASSISTANT VALUATION OFFI CER WAS RIGHTLY NOT FOUND CORRECT BY THE CIT(A). MOREOVER, AS STATED IN THE EARLY PART OF THIS ORDER THAT 1/5 TH PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED BY SHARVAN KUMAR AGARWAL FOR A CONSIDERATION OF ` 2,00,000/- IN THE YEAR 2002. THIS STRENGTHENS THE VALUATION DONE BY THE RE GISTERED VALUER OF ASSESSEE. IN THE GIVEN BACKGROUND OF THE PROPERTY A S ENUMERATED EARLIER THE VALUATION AS PER STAMP DUTY AUTHORITY A T ` 19,64000/- WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE THE REGISTER ED VALUER HAS FOLLOWED RENT CAPITALIZATION METHOD OF VALUATION WH ILE THE ASSISTANT VALUATION OFFICER HAS NOT DONE SO. THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RIGHTLY DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE SALE PRICE OF ` 5,40,000/- SHOWN BY ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING THE CAPITAL GAIN AND NOT SECTION 50C VALUE OR THE VALUE DETERMINED BY ASSESS ING OFFICER. THIS 10 ITA NO. 5411/MUM/2012 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA REASONED FINDING OF THE CIT(A) NEEDS NO INTERFERENC E FROM OUR SIDE. WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2015. 30.11.2015 SD/- SD/- ( RAJESH KUMAR ) ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. / THE CIT(A) - 30, MUMBAI 4. / THE CIT - 19, MUMBAI 5. / DR, A BENCH ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// /ASSTT. REGISTRAR) /ITAT, MUMBAI N.P.