TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1263
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4/2014-15 & CIT(A)-10/ITO Ward-3(1)282/2014-15 , in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short "the Act". 2. It is evident at the outset that all these appeals suffer from delay of 161 days in filing except second case ITA No.114/Ahd/2016 involving delay of 195 days. These assessees have filed condonation petitions as well. First assessee Shri Ujwal Maheshbhai Pandya pleads therein that he is employed in IT sector in Mohali, Punjab. He is stated to be visiting his parents on very few occasions in year. The said appellant accordingly avers that his old parents had received the CIT(A)'s order in question which could be handed over to him on his visit to Ahmedabad. His further case is that after getting copy of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regular assessments in these three cases on 10.02.2014 making long term capital gain each of Rs. 11,03,830/-. The CIT(A) confirms the same in the lower appellate's order under challenge. 4. Heard both sides. Learned counsel Shri Divetia at the outset files before us a copy CIT(A)-V, Ahmedabad's order dated 01.05.2015 in case of yet another co-owner Shri Yagnesh Ashwinkumar Pandya reversing Assessing Officer's action in referring valuation issue of the very capital asset in question as not sustainable u/s.55A of the Act reading as under: "4.3. I have considered the facts of the case and submission made by the appellant. In this case, the AO has increased the long term capital gain amount by reducing the cost of acquisition of the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....O. and subsequently, through the written submissions in the appellate proceedings this rate taken for cost of acquisition has been challenged which ultimately increased the long terra capital gain in the hands of the appellant to the extent of his share in the said land, 4.4. Considering the facts and submission, it is found that the appellant has challenged the valuation made by the Valuation Officer on various accounts which have some substance. However, it has been found that the reference made by the AO in the assessment proceedings to the Valuation Officer in view of the Provisions of Section 55A was itself not in accordance with the previsions of law. As per the provisions of Section 55A the reference could only be made when the fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court in the ease of CIT Vs. Daulal Mohta HUF 360 ITR 680 has held as under:- CAPITAL GAINS - COMPUTATION - COST OF ACQUISITON - FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ON 1-4-1981 - REFERENCE TO DEPARTMENTAL VALUAT10N OFFICER - ONLY VALUE OF CAPITAL ASSET SHOWN BY ASSESSEE LESS THAN ITS FIAR MARKET VALUE - INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 s. 55A. Reference to the Departmental Valuation. Officer can only be made in cases where the value of the capital asset shown by the assessee is less than Us fair market value as on April, 1, 1981, 'Where the value of the capital asset shown by the assessee on the basis of the approved valuer's report was more than its fair market value, reference under section 55A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not valid. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee has relied upon a registered valuer's report, AO can proceed only under cl. (a) and cl. (b) would not be applicable - in the instant case, admittedly, the assessee had relied on the estimate made by the registered valuer for the purpose of supporting its valuation of the asset - Any such situation is governed by cl. (a) of s. 55A, and the AO could not have resorted to cl. (b) thereof," 4.9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the reference to the DVO is not found correct and legal and such reliance upon the AVOs report and further increasing the long term capital gain-is not justified. 4.10. It is worth here to mention that the amendment in the aforesaid provisions has only be made with effect from 1.7.2012 by the Finance Ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rst appeal ITA No.113/Ahd/2016 raising the said sole grievance is accepted. 6. We now proceed to latter two appeals seeking to claim Section 54F deduction. The CIT(A) observes that since the latter two assessees have reinvested their sale consideration money / long term capital gains in the names of their mother and brother, they are not entitled to claim the said deduction on this score alone. This reasoning is also not sustainable in the eyes of law. We reiterate the Section 54F of the Act is in the nature of a deduction provision in a taxing statute to be liberally constitute. There is no such stipulation that the said re-investment of sale consideration/long term capital gains in question is to be made only in the names of vendor ass....