TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 636
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... property sold taken by the A.O. without any cognate and direct material instead of Rs. 200/- sq.ft taken by the assessee on the basis of valuation accepted by the other A.O. in the assessment U/s 143(3) in the hand of assessee's two other brothers who are co-owners in the same transactions which is arbitrary be deleted." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 31/7/2006 declaring total income of Rs. 1,82,030/-. On the basis of information, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee alongwith his three brothers had sold ten shops at Sangwara, district- Dungarpur on 11/11/2005 for total consideration of Rs. 30 lacs whereas the Sub-Registrar had adopted the value of the shops sold at Rs. 36,2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an income of Rs. 1,82,030/- wherein no capital gains on sale of shops was disclosed. Based on the information available with the Assessing Officer regarding sale of ten shops at Sangwara, District Dungarpur by the assessee alongwith his three brothers, proceedings under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 were initiated. In response to the same the assessee filed a return of income declaring long term capital gain at Rs. 2,66,250/-. As noted in the assessment order this land was inherited by the assessee and his three brothers from their father late Shri Bhikha Bhai on 05.06.2002. After due approvals ten shops were constructed and sold at Rs. 3,00,000/- each while the value of these shops for the stamp duty purposes was taken by the registrar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he relevant portions of the statements, and the chart of the Subregistrar for applicable rates is a part of the assessment order and not being reproduced here again. In the present proceedings, the Authorized Representative relied heavily on the fact that the same calculation of capital gains as shown in the assessee's case has been accepted in the assessments of the brothers and co-owners, Assessment order of Shri Sudarshan Kumar Barwniya for Assessment Year 2006-07 and penalty order in the case of Shri Suresh Kumar Barwniya for Assessment Year 2006-07 were filed. Further, it was stated that the Assessing Officer should have accepted the value of Rs. 200/- sq. feet and the Assessing Officer has arbitrarily taken the rate as per th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owing the FMV of the said property as on 1.4.1981. therefore, the AO was justified to adopt the 'reverse method of valuation' to arrive at the FMV of the said asset on 1.4.1981. On reading of the assessment order, it is noted that during the course of assessment proceedings, the appellant had specifically and categorically informed the fact of the fair market value of the said asset as accepted by the Department in the assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act in the cases of the brothers of the appellant vide letter dated 16.9.2013 (Copy of two letters dated 16-9- 13 & 17-10-13 placed in PB at page No. 1 to 4 for ready reference and record). This fact is duly mentioned in the body of the assessment order which had never been q....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one in the cases of the appellant's brothers. (iii) There was no valid reason for the Id. Authorities Below to adopt the 'reverse method' of valuation to arrive at the FMV of the asset on the basis of the market rates in subsequent years i.e. in the year 1984 to arrive at the FMV on 1.4.1981. (iv) Before parting with, it would be in the fitness of things to rely upon the judicial citation of the honorable Punjab and & Flaryana High Court in the case of Jaswant Raj vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 477 wherein it was held "It is trite that if during the same assessment year the same quantity of wealth in possession of one co-sharer is subjected to a lower rate of taxation, it would be highly improper to burden a similarly ....