Smt. Shantaben A.Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT.,(OSD), Circle-9, Ahmedabad

MA 232/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7331 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value

Judgement Text

- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.TYAGI, JM AND A. MOHAN ALANKAMON Y, AM. M.A. NO.232/AHD/2009 IN ITA NO.2727/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR:2004-05 SMT.SHANTABEN A. PATEL, SATYAGRAH CHHAVNI, SATELLITE ROAD, (OR) 10, UNIQUE PARK, SATELLITE ROAD, AHMEDABAD. VS. DY.CIT (OSD), CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABAD. (APPLICANT) (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT) .. (RESPONDENT) (ORIGINAL APPELLANT) APPLICANT BY :- SHRI S. N. DIVATIA, AR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI VINOD TANWANI, DR DATE OF HEARING :9/12/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/12/11. O R D E R PER D. K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER . VIDE THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IT HAS BEEN ST ATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE COPY OF TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 17. 6.2009 IN ITA NO.2727/AHD/2007 FOR ASST. YEAR 2004-05 WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS BEEN PARTLY ALLOWED. THE ASSESSEE NOTIC ED THAT GROUND NO.2 RELATES TO THE SALE CONSIDERATION TAKEN BY AO U/S 5 0C(1) OF THE ACT AT RS.47,43,388/- AS AGAINST THE APPARENT CONSIDERATIO N DECLARED BY THE M.A. NO.232/AHD/2009 IN ITA NO.2727/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR 2004-05 2 ASSESSEE AT RS.43.93 LACS IN THE SALE DEED. THE TRI BUNAL HAS REVERSED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORED THE ORDER OF THE AO ON THIS ISSUE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- EVEN NOW BEFORE US, ON QUERY FROM THE BENCH THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE SALE DEED AND REBUTTED THAT THE ASSESSE D VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT AS PER THE SUB-REGISTRAR VALUATION WHICH IS RS.47,43,388/- AS NARRATED BY THE AO. ALONG WITH THE SUBMISSION, THE COPY OF REGISTERED S ALE DEED DATED 23.1.2004 WAS HANDED OVER TO THE BENCH CLERK FOR BE ING PRODUCED BEFORE THE HONBLE MEMBERS. THE ASSESSEE HAD SPECIFICALLY DRAWN ATTENTION TO THE LAST PAGE OF THE SAID SALE DEED WHEREIN THE STA MP AUTHORITY HAD CLEARLY STATED THAT THE MARKET VALUE WAS DECIDED AT RS.47,43,388/- BUT IN VIEW OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DECLARED PRICE A ND SAID MARKET VALUE AS DETERMINED DID NOT EXCEED MORE THAN 10%, NO STAM P DUTY WAS CALLED UPON TO BE PAID ON THE DIFFERENCE IN VIEW OF PROVIS O TO SECTION 32C OF THE STAMP ACT. THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN PLACED ON RECORD THE LAST PAGE OF THE AFORESAID SALE DEED (GUJARATI) ALONG WITH ENGLISH T RANSLATION OF THE REMARKS MADE BY STAMP AUTHORITY THEREON. 2. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO FAILURE TO PRODUCE THE SALE DEED ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE OF LAW APPAR ENT ON RECORD INASMUCH AS THE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE STAMP AUTHORITY WAS RS. 43.92 LACS AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PAID ANY STAMP DUTY ON RS.47,43,38 8/-, THE SALE M.A. NO.232/AHD/2009 IN ITA NO.2727/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR 2004-05 3 CONSIDERATION EVEN U/S 50C(1) WOULD BE RS.43.92 LAC S. THE QUESTION OF TAKING THE ASSESSED VALUE BY THE STAMP AUTHORITY WO ULD BE APPLICABLE ONLY WHEN SUCH VALUE WAS TAKEN BY THE STAMP AUTHORI TY AND THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO PAY STAMP DUTY ON SUCH VALUE. THERE FORE, IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE MISTAKE ARISEN IN THE ORDER MAY KINDLY BE CORRECTED AS PER LAW. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GOIN G THROUGH THE RECORD WE FIND THAT COPY OF SALE DEED WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WHICH IS ON RECOR D BUT THE SAME HAS BEEN INADVERTENTLY OVERLOOKED WHILE DISPOSING OF TH E APPEAL. THIS IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. THEREFORE, WE RECALL OUR ORDER DATED 17.06.2009 FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL IN DUE COURSE. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21/12/11. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICI AL MEMBER AHMEDABAD, MAHATA/- M.A. NO.232/AHD/2009 IN ITA NO.2727/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR 2004-05 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1.DATE OF DICTATION 9/12/2011. 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER.OTHER MEMBER 19/12/2011 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.. 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..