Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA
Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi
आदेश /O R D E R
PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-
This appeal by the Revenue is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XII, Kolkata dated 12.03.2013. Assessment was framed by DCIT, Circle-11, Kolkata u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 27.12.2007 for assessment year 2005-06. Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-
1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in adopting the value of the property at Rs.85,00,000/- keeping in view the value determined by DVO instead of value determined at Rs.1,47,00,000/- by the Stamp Valuation Authority u/s. 50C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
DCIT Cir.11 Kol. v. M/s Life pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Page 2
2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in considering the valuation determined by DVO u/s. 50C(2) of the IT Act, 1961 due to the fact that the provision of Section 50C(2) is applicable for Wealth Tax purpose.”
Shri Abhijit Biswas Ld. Authorized Representative appeared on behalf of assessee and Shri Kalyan Nath, Ld. Departmental Representative appeared on behalf of Revenue.
First ground raised by Revenue is as regards to Ld. CIT(A) erred in adopting the value of property and determined by District Valuation Officer (DVO for short) instead of value as determined by the Stamp Valuation Authority.
At the outset, it was observed that the issue is arising out of the appeal which was disposed of by remitting back by this Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in dated 19.10.2012 for AY 2005-06 to the ld. CIT(A) by observing as follows :- “At this point, we are of the view that there is no doubt about applicability of provisions of section 50C of the Act on the above transactions but only question is whether the value as adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority for registration of sale deed is to be adopted or there is any DVO’s report on a reference by AO or CIT(A), this is to be examined. In such circumstances, ewe have no option except to set aside this matter back to the file of CIT(A), who will consider the DVO’s report and stamp valuation done based on circle rates. The CIT after allowing opportunity to AO as well as the assessee will decide the issue in terms of the provisions of section 50C of the Act.”
The Ld. CIT(A) has accordingly passed order in terms of direction contemplated by this Co-ordinate Bench as aforesaid. So the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) was nothing but to give effect to the direction of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal. As such, in our considered view, the issue has already been settled by this Hon’ble Tribunal to adopt the valuation of the DVO for working out the capital gain under section 50C of the Act. Accordingly we do DCIT Cir.11 Kol. v. M/s Life pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Page 3 not find any reason to interfere in the order of ld. CIT(A) Hence, this ground of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed.
Coming to next issue raised by Revenue is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in applying the provision of Sec. 50C(2) of the Act which, in fact, is the provision for the purpose of Wealth Tax Act, 1957. At the outset, we find that the provision of Sec.50C of the Act is very much applicable to the income of the assessee under the Income Tax Act. Therefore, we have no alternative except dismiss this ground as defective and in fructuous. We hold accordingly.