, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI . . , , BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, J UDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 6516 /MUM/ 20 13 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 - 08 ) SHRI DOMINICA F GOMES, JULIE VILLA, GOMES STREET, BHAYANDER (W), THANE - 401101 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2 (1) ROOM NO.2 9 , B WING, 6 TH FLOOR, ASHAR IT PA RK, WAGLE ESTATE, THANE(W), ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /PAN. : AAVPG0814F / APPELLANT BY : SHRI V IRAG H SHAH / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI UDAY B JAKKE / DATE OF HEARING : 9 .12. 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12. 2. 2016 O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN,AM : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12 - 08 - 2013 PASSED BY LD CIT(A) - II, THANE AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08. THE SOLITARY ISSUE URGED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF SEC. 50C OF THE ACT TO THE LAND TRANSFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH TWO OTHER CO - OWNERS. 2. WE HEARD THE PART IES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE AND TWO OTHER CO - OWNERS TRANSFERRED A LAND FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.59.76 ITA NO .6516/ MUM/20 13 2 LACS. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE VALUATION ADOPTED FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES WAS RS.167.10 LAKHS AND ACCORDINGLY THE AO SUBSTITUTED THE VALUE O F SALE CONSIDERATION WITH THE STAMP DUTY VALUATION AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 50C OF THE ACT. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS DONE SO IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY AND NO ADJUSTMENT WAS MADE IN THE CASE OF OTHER TWO CO - OWNERS. 3. IN THE APPELLA TE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO OBTAIN A VALUATION REPORT FROM THE DVO, WHO ESTIMATED THE VALUE AT RS.117.03 LAKHS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO RECOMPUTED THE CAPITAL GAINS BY ADOPTING THE SALE CONSIDERATION AT RS.117.03 LAKHS. STILL AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 50C COULD NOT APPLIED IN THE PECULIAR FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, SINCE THE LAND TRANSFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS AFFECTED BY THE PROVISIONS OF URBAN LAND CEILING ACT. IN THIS REGARD, HE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF S.N.WADIYAR VS. CWT (2015)(378 ITR 9)(SC). ACCORDINGLY THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, REFERRED ABOVE, MAY BE FOLLOWED FOR DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 5. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR EXAMINING THE SAME AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION RENDERED BY HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF S.N.WADIYAR (SUPRA). 6. HAVING HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE REQUIRES FRESH EXAMINATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF S.N.WADIYAR (SUPRA). ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ITA NO .6516/ MUM/20 13 3 ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE AO TO RE - EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF DISCUSSIONS MADE SUPRA. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 12TH FEB ,2016 . SD SD ( / SANDEEP GOSAIN) ( . . / B.R.BASKARAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED .. 12TH FEB ,201 6 . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - CONCERNED 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / D R, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , /ITAT, MUMBAI