B.N.Properties Holdings (P) Ltd., Coimbatore V. ACIT, Coimbatore

ITA 545/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68698 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T N BETGERI IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: N QUADIR HOSEYN
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 143(3); 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.545(MDS)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S.B.N.PROPERTIES HOLDINGS (P) LTD., 1420-TRICHY ROAD, COIMBATORE. PAN AABCB3456H. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(1), COIMBATORE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.QUADIR HO SEYN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.N.BETGERI, IRS , JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 18 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-I AT COIMBATORE, DATED 24-1-2013 AND ARISES OUT OF THE A SSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961. - - ITA 545 OF 2013 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD ONE PROPERTY AT KUMBAKONAM DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. ACCORDING TO THE ASS ESSEE, THE DOCUMENT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS ` 87,86,135/-. THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS ` 1,28,03,500/-. THEREFORE, NATURALLY, THE REGISTRATION WAS CARRIED OUT FOR THE GUIDELINE VALU E OF ` 1,28,03,500/-. 3. THE ASSESSEE COMPUTED THE LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAI NS ARISING OUT OF THE SALE OF THE LANDED PROPERTY ON T HE BASIS OF THE DOCUMENT VALUE AGREED BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE BUYER. BUT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS COMPELLED BY LAW, AD OPTED THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF 1,28,03,500/-, NECESSITATED UNDE R SECTION 50C OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, BEING THE SALE CONSIDE RATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ACCORDINGLY COMPUTED THE LONG-TERM CAP ITAL GAINS ASSESSABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE COURSE OF THAT ORIGINAL FIRST ROUND OF ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO REQUESTED FOR REF ERRING THE MATTER TO DISTRICT VALUATION OFFICER (DVO). BUT, N O SUCH REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THE DVO. - - ITA 545 OF 2013 3 5. THE MATTER WAS TAKEN IN FIRST APPEAL. THE ASSE SSEE REPEATED ITS REQUEST FOR REFERRING THE MATTER TO TH E DVO BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS). THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) ANYHOW REJECTED THE PLEA AND CONFIRMED THE COMPUTATION OF LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS AS WORKE D OUT BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. 6. THE MATTER WAS TAKEN IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL SET ASIDE THE MATTER AND DI RECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REFER THE VALUATION OF THE PRO PERTY TO THE DVO UNDER SECTION 50C OF THE ACT AND THEREAFTER COM PUTE THE LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS ON THE BASIS OF THE VALUE R EPORTED BY THE DVO. THE DVO ESTIMATED THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY A T ` 1,08,35,000/- AS AGAINST THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF ` 1,28,03,500/- CONSIDERED IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. THE REMAND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY ADOPTING T HE VALUE REPORTED BY THE DVO AT ` 1,08,35,000/-. THIS WAS AGAIN TAKEN UP BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE REMAND ASSESSMENT. THE ASSESSEE IS A GGRIEVED AND THEREFORE IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE SECOND TIME. - - ITA 545 OF 2013 4 7. NOW, THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE DVO HAS NOT CONSIDERED MANY OF THE VALID OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE VALUE OF ` 1,08,35,000/- ARRIVED AT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND, THEREFO RE, THE VALUE CONCEDED BY THE ASSESSEE AT ` 87,86,135/- SHOULD BE TREATED AS THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE PURP OSE OF COMPUTING LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS. 8. WE HEARD SHRI N.QUADIR HOSEYN, THE LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI T.N.BET GERI, THE LEARNED JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE. 9. IN THE FIRST ROUND OF ASSESSMENT, THE DISPUTE W AS BETWEEN THE DOCUMENT VALUE OF ` 87,86,135/- AND THE GUIDELINE VALUE OF ` 1,28,03,500/-. IN THE PRESENT ROUND OF PROCEEDING S, THE DISPUTE IS BETWEEN THE DOCUMENT VALUE OF ` 87,86,135/- AND THE DVO ESTIMATE OF ` 1,08,35,000/-. COMPARED TO THE GUIDELINE VALUE, THE DVO HAS GIVEN A RELIEF OF ABOUT ` 20 LAKHS TO THE ASSESSEE IN FIXING THE VALUE AT ` 1,08,35,000/-. 10. CONSIDERING ALL THE ASPECTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE RE-FIX THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT ` 1 CRORE AS - - ITA 545 OF 2013 5 AGAINST THE VALUATION DETERMINED BY THE DVO AT ` 1,08,35,000/- AND THE DOCUMENT VALUE OF 87,86,135/-. 11. WITH THIS MODIFICATION, THE APPEAL IS DISPOSED OF AS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18 TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 18 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013. V.A.P. COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GF.