Sh.Ishwar Chand, Chandigarh V. Income Tax Officer Ward-5 (3), Chandigarh

ITA 554/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0084 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RATTAN KAUR
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 554/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SH ISHWAR CHAND, VS. THE ITO, WARD 5(3), CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO. ADMPC504G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MS. RATTAN KAUR RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.K. MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 21.04.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.04.2016 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH DATED 13.2.2015 RELATING TO AS SESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE C ONFIRMATION OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ADOPTING THE SALE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS PER THE VALUE ADOPTED BY STAMP DUTY AUTHORITIES AT RS. 75,68,761/- AS AGAINST THE SALE CONSIDERATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 24,30,000/-. 2 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE SO LD HIS 50% SHARE IN PLOT NO. 522, MILK COLONY, DHANAS FOR TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATI ON OF RS. 24,30,000/-. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADOPTED THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY FOR COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAINS AS PER THE VALUE ADOPT ED BY STAMP DUTY AUTHORITIES AT RS. 75,68,761/- INVOKING PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ABOVE ACTION OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT ACTUAL S ALE CONSIDERATION AS WELL AS MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY WAS LESS THAN THE STAM P DUTY VALUE ADOPTED BY THE STAMP DUTY VALUATION AUTHORITY. THE LD. CIT(A) CON SIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE REFERRED THE MATTER TO THE GOVERNMENT VALUATION OFFICER FOR ESTIMATING THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF SALE TRANSACTION IN QUESTION. THE VALUATION OFFICER, HOWEVER, VALUED TH E PROPERTY AT RS. 83,25,600/- WHICH WAS MORE THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AS PER THE VALUE OF STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY. THEREFORE, LD CIT(A), AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C(3) OF THE ACT HELD THAT WHERE THE VALUE ASSESSED U/S 50C(2) EXCEEDS VALUE ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY, TH E VALUE ASSESSED BY STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY WAS TO BE TAKEN FOR COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAINS. HE, ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ADOPTING THE SALE VALUE AS THAT OF THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY. BEING AGGRIE VED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS COME IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THE ASSESSE E HAS NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD AS TO HOW AND IN WHAT MANNER THE VALE ESTIMA TED BY THE GOVERNMENT VALUATION OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE VALUATION OFFICER HAS VALUED THE PROPERTY AT A HIGH ER AMOUNT THAN THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY, DIRECTED THAT THE VALUATION OF THE STAMP DUTY AUTHORITY BEING LOWER OF THE TWO, SHOULD BE ADOPTED. WE DO NOT FIND 3 ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS HEREBY UPHELD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEING DEVOID OF ANY MERIT, IS HEREBY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21.04.2016. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 21 ST APRIL, 2016 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR 4