Smt. Vimlaben Jashbhai Patel, Kheda V. The DCIT, Kheda Circle, Nadiad

ITA 873/AHD/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the legal heir of Late Smt. Vimlaben Jashbhai Patel against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Vadodara, concerning the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary contention revolves around the validity of the service of notice under Section 148 and the subsequent assessment order under Sections 144 and 147, which were challenged for being 'bad in law' due to alleged improper service. Additionally, the appellant contested the CIT(A)'s confirmation of an addition of Rs.24,32,800 as Long Term Capital Gain under Section 50C, arguing that the matter should have been referred to the DVO for a proper valuation. The Assessing Officer had initially reopened the assessment and made the addition based on the difference between the sale value declared in the sale deed and the Jantri value adopted for stamp duty purposes.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129476 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 31-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 50C; 142(1)

Judgement Text

ITA No.873/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.873/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Late Smt. Vimlaben Jashbhai Patel, vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Represented by her legal heir Tax, Kheda Circle, Nadiad. Bhupendrabhai Jashbhai Patel, 68, Ashburton Avenue, Ilford, Essex, IG3 9ER, United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. [PAN – CCVPP 3709 A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, ARs Revenue by : Shri Ramesh Kumar, JCIT Date of hearing : 01.02.2023 Date of pronouncement : 15.02.2023 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the Assessee against order dated 27.03.2019 passed by the CIT(A)-2, Vadodara for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee has raised the following ground of appeal :- “1. The proceedings conducted in pursuance of notice u/s.148 and consequent assessment order passed u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 are bad in law for the want of valid service of notice. 2. Without prejudice to above ground of appeal, (i) Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on fact in not adjudicating ground no.1, which is related to invalid service of notice and ground no.3 related to substitution of stamp duty valuation without referring the matter to DVO while disposing the appeal of appellant. (ii) Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on fact in confirming the addition of Rs.24,32,800/- made by Assessing Officer by invoking the provision of Sec.50C without appreciating the facts and law properly.” ITA No.873/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 of 3 3. The assessee sold immovable property i.e. non-agricultural land and house constructed thereon situated at Anand. During the Financial Year 2011-12 by showing the sale value of Rs.4,90,000/- in sale deed but the Sub-Registrar has taken Jantri value of the said property of Rs.24,32,800/- for stamp duty purpose. Therefore, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had shown sale value of the said property less by Rs.19,42,800/- and as the assessee did not file return of income though the amount of capital gain of Rs.24,32,800/- the same is chargeable to tax under Section 45 r.w.s. 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer, after recording the reasons, reopened the assessment of the assessee by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 03.02.2016 after obtaining necessary approval. Therefore, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 14.07.2016. Despite giving several opportunities, the assessee did not file any details and, therefore, the Assessing Officer passed the Assessment Order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act and made addition of Rs.24,32,800/- as Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG). 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee expired on 27.06.2019 and, therefore, Legal Heir i.e. son of the assessee has been brought on record through application dated 29.11.2022. 6. The said application to bring the Legal Heir on record is taken on record. 7. On the merits of the case, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) was not right in confirming the addition of Rs.24,32,800/- as the valuation of the DVO was not taken into account by the CIT(A) and in fact the Stamp Duty Valuation Authority’s valuation has been adopted without giving any proper opportunity to the assessee at the time of assessment order as no notice was received by the assessee. Ld. AR further submitted that the valuation of the DVO should have been verified in consonance with the sale value taken by the assessee and thus the matter needs verification and the same to be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer. ITA No.873/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 3 of 3 8. Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 9. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. There is an observation by the Assessing Officer that the assessee sold the immovable property during the F.Y. 2011-12 relevant to the present A.Y. by showing sale value of Rs.4,90,000/- in sale deed. The Sub-registrar has taken the Jantri value of the said property at Rs.24,32,800/- for stamp duty purposes. There is a difference between the sale value as determined by the assessee in the sale deed and the value adopted by the Stamp Duty Valuation Authority and the same needs verification in respect of the Jantri value as well as actual value of the property. The Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) has not taken cognisance as per the provisions of Section 50C of the Act and, therefore, this requires proper verification and adjudication. Thus, the issue is remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication and verification in respect of valuation by DVO and Jantri value as well as the sale value taken into account by the assessee and by the Department and adjudicate the matter as per law. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical propose. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 15 th day of February, 2023. Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 15 th day of February, 2023 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad