SARITA SANGAM SOCIETY,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, VADODARA

By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 23rd September, 2016, passed by the Learned CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2012-2013.

Grievance of the assessee, in substance is against learned CIT(A) upholding the additions of Rs.30,58,775/- under section 50C, in adopting sale consideration for the purpose of computing the capital gains.

The issue in appeal lies in a narrow compass of material facts. During the relevant previous year, the assessee is said to have sold, by way of a public auction, a plot of land for a consideration of Rs.18,80,000/-. While the auction is said to have taken place on 27.02.2011, the actual sale deed was executed on 02.07.2011. While

We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position.

As a plain reading of section 50C(2) shows, when “the assessee claims before any Assessing Officer that the value adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority exceeds the fair market value of the property”, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the property to the Departmental Valuation Officer. Clearly, therefore, a specific request for reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer is not at all required to be made by the assessee, and all that is required to invoke the reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer is a dispute being raised on valuation as per stamp duty valuation authority. In any event, as is the settled legal position in the light of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court’s judgment in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT (GA No.3686/2013; judgement dated 13th March 2014) “even in a case where no such prayer is made by the assessee …… the Assessing Officer, discharging a quasi judicial function has the bounden duty to act fairly and to give a fair treatment by giving him an option to follow the course provided by the law’’. In the light of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we deem it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to refer the valuation of property to the Departmental Valuation Officer, and to frame the fresh assessment in the light of, inter alia, Departmental Valuation Officer’s report, in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee and by way of a speaking order. The matter thus stands restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in the terms indicated above.

As we part with the matter, we may add that there is apparently also a dispute with respect of the point of time as to which stamp duty valuation is to be adopted - at the point of time when agreement to sell was finalized or when sale deed was

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes for in the terms indicated above. Pronounced in the open court on this 16th day of May, 2018.