2019 (12) TMI 1077 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows appeal despite delay, applies Section 50C for capital gains, and orders revaluation.

Shri Bathula Venugopal Hyderabad Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 4 (3) Hyderabad

The Tribunal condoned a one-day delay in filing the appeal, allowing it to proceed. Section 50C was applied to compute capital gains on immovable property ... Claim of deduction u/s 54 made by the assessee on a property the assessee - Admission of additional ground for reference to the Valuation Officer - HELD THAT:- Since the additional ground raised by the assessee is for reference to the Valuation Officer and the assessee had already raised the said objection before the CIT (A), as deem it fit and proper to admit the same and adjudicate as under. Since the assessee had raised its objection to the adoption of the SRO value u/s 50C of the Act, by pointing out certain deficiencies in the property, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the CIT (A) and remand the issue to the file of the AO with a direction to refer the valuation of the property to the valuation cell and recompute the capital gain after giving the assessee a fair opportunity of hearing including claim of deduction u/s 54 made by the assessee on a property the assessee. Issues:1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal.2. Applicability of section 50C on the sale of immovable properties.3. Rejection of claim of exemption u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act.4. Referral to Valuation Officer for determining property value.5. Admissibility of additional ground raised by the assessee.Issue 1: Condonation of delay in filing appeal before the TribunalThe judgment addressed a one-day delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. An affidavit was filed by the assessee seeking condonation of the delay. Considering the minimal delay, the Tribunal condoned the delay, allowing the appeal to proceed.Issue 2: Applicability of section 50C on the sale of immovable propertiesThe case involved the sale of two immovable properties by the assessee, with the Assessing Officer (AO) applying section 50C due to the SRO value exceeding the sale consideration mentioned in the sales deed. The AO computed long-term capital gains based on the SRO value. The CIT (A) upheld the AO's decision, rejecting the assessee's contention of capital loss and claim of exemption u/s 54. The Tribunal noted the objections raised by the assessee regarding deficiencies affecting the property's value and remanded the issue to the AO for revaluation, directing a fair opportunity for the assessee to present their case.Issue 3: Rejection of claim of exemption u/s 54 of the Income Tax ActThe CIT (A) rejected the assessee's claim of exemption u/s 54 on the grounds that it was not made in the return of income. The Tribunal, upon review, found that the CIT (A) should have considered the claim of deduction u/s 54 and directed the AO to recompute the capital gain after revaluation of the property by the valuation cell.Issue 4: Referral to Valuation Officer for determining property valueThe assessee raised an additional ground requesting referral to the Valuation Officer for determining the property's appropriate value, citing local factors affecting the market value. The Tribunal admitted the additional ground and set aside the CIT (A)'s order, remanding the issue to the AO for valuation by the valuation cell and reevaluation of capital gains, ensuring a fair hearing for the assessee.Issue 5: Admissibility of additional ground raised by the assesseeThe Tribunal admitted the additional ground raised by the assessee regarding referral to the Valuation Officer, considering the objections previously raised before the CIT (A). The Tribunal deemed it appropriate to allow the additional ground and directed the revaluation of the property by the AO, ultimately treating the assessee's appeal as allowed for statistical purposes.