2016 (12) TMI 304

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g grounds of appeal :- 1. That on the facts and circumstance of the case, the CIT(A) has grossed erred - in accepting the unlawful act of Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Surat (herein after refer as learned AO) of levying penalty amounting to Rs. 3,04,330/- u/s. 27l(l)(c) on deemed addition arising u/s. 50C. in confirming the penalty even though the subject case was squarely covered matter and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Tribunal has deleted the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) on deemed addition arising u/s. 50C in many cases. in not following the principles of judicial discipline. 2. The appellant craves to add, amend, alter, substitute, modify any or all the above grounds of appeal, if necessa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere were five transactions of sale of lands and the total value of sale consideration as per agreement was at Rs. 73,95,206/- whereas the jantri price adopted by Dy. Collector for the purpose of charging Stamp Duty was taken at Rs. 10107600/-. The difference of the jantri price as against sale consideration came to Rs. 27,12,394/-. It was considered as deemed differentiated consideration by ld. Assessing Officer u/s 50C of the Act. Ld. AR further submitted that the impugned transaction for sale of land were carried out at fair market value on the basis of sale rate adopted for land situated nearby. Further no evidence was brought on record by ld. Assessing Officer to prove that assessee has received consideration over and above the agreemen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eement as against jantri price of the properties sold. We further observe that the impugned addition of Rs. 27,12,394/- was merely based on the calculation made by ld. Assessing Officer taking jantri price as against sale price shown by the assessee. At any point of time Revenue has not placed on record any material evidence to show that the assessee has received consideration over and above the agreement value. Penalty of Rs. 3,04,330/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been imposed on the addition confirmed u/s 50C of the Act. We further observe that similar type of facts came up before the Coordinate Bench in the case of Mafatlal Nathalal Patel vs. DCIT (supra) wherein penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was deleted by the Coordinate bench by ob....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of the AO that the assessee has received consideration over and above than that declared in the sales deed. The AO has not disputed the consideration received by the assessee. The addition has been made on the basis of deeming provisions of section 50C. The assessee has furnished all the facts of sale, documents/ material before the AO. The AO has not doubted the genuineness of the documents/details furnished by the assessee. Only because the assessee agreed to the additions because of the deeming provisions it cannot be construed to be filing of inaccurate particulars on the part of the assessee. The assessee agreed to addition on the basis of valuation made by the stamp valuation authority cannot be a conclusive proof that the sale cons....