Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
The captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee and is directed against the impugned order dated 03/01/2014 of CIT(A)-24, Mumbai, pertaining to the assessment year 2007-08, which in turn has arisen from an order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 08/11/2012 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961( in short “the Act”).
In this appeal, although the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, but the only dispute relates to the adoption of full value of consideration for the purposes of computing capital gain on sale of immovable property located at K.M House, Issaji Street, Mumbai.
In brief, the relevant facts are that the assesee alongwith Co- owner, Shri Rajnikant N. Sota was 50% owner of the said property, which was sold for a consideration of Rs.21.00 lacs during the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer noticed that since the value of the property adopted for the purposes of stamp duty valuation was higher than the stated consideration, he applied the provision of section 50C of the Act and calculated capital gains after considering the value adopted by the Stamp Duty Valuation authorities as full consideration at Rs.18,61,250/- as against the actual consideration of Rs.10,50,000/-. The CIT(Appeals) also affirmed the action of the Assessing Officer in applying the provisions of section 50C of the Act.
Before me, the Ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that in the case of the Co-owner Shri Rajnikant N.Sota, the fair market value of the property was valued by the DVO, which was lower than the value adopted by the Stamp Duty Valuation authorities. Therefore, it was requested that the matter be set-aside to the file of the Assessing Officer to calculate the capital gain in accordance the provisions of section 50C(3) of the Act.
The Ld. Departmental Representative did not dispute the factual matrix brought out by the Ld. Representative for the assessee.
In view of the aforesaid, the order of CIT(Appeals) is set-aside and the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to re- work the adoption of full value of consideration in terms of section 50C of the Act as per the provisions of sub-section(3) of section 50C of the Act in line with the value adopted in the case of the Co-owner Shri Rajnikant N. Sota. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall allow the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing an order afresh on this aspect in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as above.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29/02/2016.