Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for computing capital gains, the fair market value estimated by the Valuation Officer could be substituted for the actual sale consideration declared by the assessee in the absence of material showing understatement of consideration.
Analysis: Capital gains under section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are computed on the basis of the full value of consideration received on transfer of the capital asset. A reference under section 55A may assist in ascertaining market value, but market value by itself does not become the full consideration unless the Revenue brings material to show that the consideration actually received was understated. The earlier deeming approach under section 52, as explained in the binding precedents relied upon, could not be invoked in an honest and bona fide transaction where the Revenue failed to establish suppression of sale consideration. In the present matter, the assessment was founded substantially on the Valuation Officer's estimate, without independent evidence that the assessee had received more than what was disclosed.
Conclusion: The fair market value could not be treated as the full value of consideration, and the addition made on that basis was not sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of cogent evidence of understatement of sale consideration, capital gains must be computed on the actual consideration received and not on an ed fair market value obtained through valuation alone.