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 addition under section 69B could be sustained on the basis of stamp duty valuation and alleged unexplained investment in the absence of evidence of extra consideration.
Analysis: The recorded sale consideration in the sale deed matched the amount shown as paid by the assessee, and there was no direct evidence that any amount over and above the disclosed consideration had been paid. Section 50C applies to computation of capital gains in the hands of the seller and its presumption could not be imported against the purchaser. For section 69B to apply, the Assessing Officer was required to establish actual unexplained investment by the assessee; mere adoption of market value by the stamp authority, or the description of the payment as an advance, was insufficient. The material on record also supported the explanation that registration was delayed due to mortgage constraints, and did not show any unrecorded payment.
Conclusion: The addition under section 69B was rightly deleted and the Revenue's appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 69B can be invoked only when the Revenue establishes actual unexplained investment, and stamp duty valuation under section 50C cannot by itself be used to infer extra consideration in the hands of the purchaser.