Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Set-off of Loss & Capital Gain: Tribunal Rules on Property Sale</h1> The case involved issues of non-allowance of set off of long-term loss against long-term capital gain and computation of short-term capital gain on the ... Computation of short term capital gain - The assessee was called upon to explain as to why the provisions of section 50C be not applied for the purposes of computing capital gain - The assessee was called upon to explain as to why the value adopted by DVO be not rejected - Admittedly the stamp value of the said flat on the date of transfer was ₹ 1.18 crores - It is apparent from a bare perusal of the above provision that the directive of sub-section (1) of section 50C is not absolute - The mechanism for redressal of grievance by the assessee in a case where such stamp valuation is on a higher side, has been enshrined in sub-section (2) of section 50C - It is not open to the Assessing Officer to set aside the report of the Valuation Officer and then go by his own whims and fanciesFrom sub-section (2) of section 50C it can be noticed that where the assessee disputes the valuation of stamp valuation authority, “the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the capital assets to a Valuation Officer - if the value determined by the DVO under sub-section (2) is lower than that of the value adopted, assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1), the value so estimated under sub-section (2) shall be binding on the Assessing Officer and the assessment shall be made accordingly. In our considered opinion both the authorities below erred in taking shelter of the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 50C in disregarding the value determined by the DVO.DVO determined fair market value at ₹ 46.48 lakhs, which is lower than the value for the purpose of stamp duty at ₹ 1.18 crore - As per the provisions of section 50C(2), the capital gain is required to be computed by considering the fair market value of the property at ₹ 46,48,781 as the full value of the consideration received or accruing to the assessee as a result of the transfer of capital asset - In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Issues Involved:1. Non-allowance of set off of long-term loss against long-term capital gain.2. Computation of short-term capital gain on the sale of property rights.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Non-allowance of Set Off of Long-term Loss Against Long-term Capital Gain:The appellant did not press Ground No. 7, which challenged the non-allowance of set off of long-term loss of Rs. 72,216 against long-term capital gain. Consequently, this ground was dismissed.2. Computation of Short-term Capital Gain on the Sale of Property Rights:Facts and Background:The appellant purchased a flat for Rs. 30,00,000 in October 2003 and sold it in September 2004 for Rs. 35,00,000. The Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the stamp duty valuation of the flat was Rs. 1,18,07,180 and proposed to apply Section 50C of the Income-tax Act for computing capital gain. The appellant argued that the market value of the property could not have increased so significantly within a year and requested the AO to refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO). The DVO valued the property at Rs. 46,48,781.Assessing Officer's Determination:The AO rejected the DVO's valuation, arguing that the rate per square foot was too low and no deductions were required towards Transferable Development Rights (TDR) and construction costs. The AO adopted the stamp duty valuation of Rs. 1.18 crore for computing short-term capital gain at Rs. 85,83,430.Legal Provisions and Tribunal's Analysis:- Section 48: Provides the mode of computation of income under the head 'Capital gains'.- Section 50C: Special provision for the determination of full value of consideration in certain cases. Sub-section (1) mandates that if the sale consideration is less than the value adopted by the stamp valuation authority, the latter shall be deemed as the full value of consideration.- Section 50C(2): Allows the AO to refer the valuation of the capital asset to a Valuation Officer if the assessee claims that the stamp valuation exceeds the fair market value. The provisions of Section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act apply, making the DVO's valuation binding on the AO.- Section 50C(3): States that if the DVO's valuation exceeds the stamp valuation, the latter shall be taken as the full value of consideration.The Tribunal noted that the AO has no authority to disregard the DVO's valuation once a reference is made under Section 50C(2). The AO must complete the assessment in conformity with the DVO's estimate as per Section 16A(6) of the Wealth-tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the DVO's valuation is binding on the AO, and the AO cannot substitute his own estimate.Conclusion:The Tribunal directed the AO to compute the capital gain by considering the DVO's valuation of Rs. 46,48,781 as the full value of consideration received or accruing to the assessee as a result of the transfer of the capital asset. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.Order Pronounced:The order was pronounced on November 4, 2010.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found