TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT allows additional grounds on transfer of development rights, CIT revises assessment, disallows deduction.</h1> <h3>Shri Akhsay V. Sandhu Versus Income tax Officer-22 (2) - (1), Mumbai</h3> Shri Akhsay V. Sandhu Versus Income tax Officer-22 (2) - (1), Mumbai - TMI Issues:1. Additional grounds of appeal regarding transfer of development rights and taxability.2. Revision of assessment by AO under section 263 based on valuation discrepancies.3. Disallowance of deduction under section 54 of the Act by AO and FAA.4. Discrepancies in valuation and consideration of property leading to enhanced income determination.5. Dispute over valuation figures and failure to refer the matter to the District Valuation Officer (DVO).6. Incomplete adjudication of claims and grounds raised by the assessee before the FAA.Issue 1: Additional Grounds of AppealThe assessee filed an appeal challenging the CIT (A)'s order, seeking to admit additional grounds related to the transfer of development rights and taxability. The ITAT admitted the additional ground, noting it as a pure legal issue not requiring factual investigation, thus allowing the assessee to raise the issue.Issue 2: Revision of Assessment under Section 263The AO completed the original assessment under section 143(3) but was directed by the CIT under section 263 to revise it due to valuation discrepancies. The CIT observed that the stamp duty valuation of the property was higher than the consideration shown by the assessee, leading to an enhanced income determination by the AO under section 263.Issue 3: Disallowance of Deduction under Section 54The FAA disallowed the claim for deduction under section 54 of the Act, as the assessee did not claim it in the original return and failed to provide sufficient explanation during the appellate proceedings, resulting in the claim being deemed unacceptable due to the absence of cost incurred towards new residential property.Issue 4: Valuation Discrepancies and Enhanced Income DeterminationThe FAA confirmed the AO's order, making further additions to the income of the assessee based on valuation discrepancies and the full consideration received. The ITAT found that the entire plot of land was not handed over to the developer, and discrepancies in valuation figures were noted, leading to the decision to restore the matter back to the FAA for fresh adjudication.Issue 5: Failure to Refer Matter to DVO and Dispute Over Valuation FiguresDuring the hearing, it was highlighted that the matter was not referred to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) despite valuation disputes. The ITAT noted discrepancies in valuation figures and the incomplete adjudication of claims, directing the FAA to re-examine the issue after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.Issue 6: Incomplete Adjudication of ClaimsThe ITAT concluded that the matter should be sent back to the FAA for fresh adjudication in the interest of justice, as certain grounds raised by the assessee remained unadjudicated. The effective ground of appeal was decided in favor of the assessee, resulting in the partial allowance of the appeal.This detailed analysis covers the various issues involved in the legal judgment delivered by the ITAT Mumbai, addressing the challenges faced by the assessee regarding valuation discrepancies, taxability, and deduction claims, ultimately leading to a partial allowance of the appeal.
TaxTMI 