Smt. Chanda Devi Kabra, NAGAUR V. ITO, MAKRANA

ITA 57/JODH/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5224 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L MOURYA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 50C; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE: SHRI N. S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER S.A.NO.02/JODH/2016 & ITA NO.57/JODH/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SMT. CHANDA DEVI KABRA, W/O. SHRI OM PRAKASH KABRA, VILL. MORER, TEHSIL PARBATSAR, DISTRICT.NAGAUR. PAN:BBEPK2722D VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, MAKRANA APPLICANT/ASSESSEE RESPONDENT APPLICANT/ASSESSEE BY SHRI AMIT KOTHARI, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. L. MOURYA, DR DATE OF HEARING: 14.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14.03.16 O R D E R PER: GEORGE MATHAN, J.M. : S. A. NO.02/JODH/2016 IS A STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.57/JODH/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. SHRI AMIT KOTHARI, THE LEARNED AR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND MR. S. L. MOURYA, LEARNED DR REPRESENT ED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESS EE THAT THE ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEING ITA NO.57/JODH/201 6 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 S. A.NO.02/JODH/2016 ITA NO.57/JODH/2016 2010-11 WAS AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT ( A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION REPRESENTING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO B Y APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE IT ACT. IT WAS A SUBMISSION T HAT THE ASSESSEE WAS THE OWNER OF A PROPERTY IN ANJU COMPLEX, 3 RD FLOOR, KOLKATA WHICH WAS SOLD FOR RS.27,46,000/-. THE SHARE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS RS.13 ,73,000/-. AS THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY ON 26-04-2008, THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED SHORT TERM CAPITAL. HOWEVER, THE SUB REGIS TRAR HAD VALUED THE PROPERTY AT RS.1,23,91,298/- FOR THE PURPOSE OF CHA RGING STAMP DUTY. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID VALUA TION. HOWEVER, THE AO HAD ADOPTED THE SUB REGISTRARS VALUE AND HAD NOT R EFERRED THE VALUATION TO THE DVO AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C (2) OF THE ACT. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT CONSEQUENTLY A DEMAND OF RS.19.60 L ACS HAS BEEN RAISED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID RS.4.12 LACS AN D BALANCE OF RS.15.65 LACS WAS DUE. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE TAX DEMA ND ITSELF EXCEEDED THE SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE THE SOURCES TO MAKE PAYMENT OF THE DISPUTED TAX LIA BILITY. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISPOSED OF BY RE STORING THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH DIRECTION TO HAVE THE PROPERTY VALUED BY THE DVO AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. TO THIS T HE LEARNED DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. 3 S. A.NO.02/JODH/2016 ITA NO.57/JODH/2016 4. THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.57/JODH/2016 IS FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) DATED 13-01-2016 P ASSED IN APPEAL NO.176/2012-13 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS SPECIFICALLY CHALLENGED THE VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HAS BEEN PROVED THAT THE VALUATION WAS INCO RRECT ON THE BASIS OF THE SUBSEQUENT SALE WHEREIN MUCH LOWER VALUE HAS BEEN A CCEPTED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITIES. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS, THE ISSUES IN APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT ITS CASE. THE AO SHALL HAVE THE PROPERTY VALUED BY THE DVO IN LINE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 50C (2) OF THE ACT. THE AO SHALL ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE STAMP VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY BEFO RE THE CONCERNED AUTHORITIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE AS SESSEE STANDS DISMISSED AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.03.2016. SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JODHPUR, DATED: 14 TH MARCH, 2016 LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/- -- - 4 S. A.NO.02/JODH/2016 ITA NO.57/JODH/2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (A) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, JODHPUR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 14.03.16 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 15.03.16 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 15.03.16 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 15.03. 16 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 15.03.16 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14.03.16 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER