TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 856
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one property there was Long Term Capital Gain which was claimed exempt as sale of agricultural land. In a survey, assessee admitted the Long Term Capital Gain and filed revised return, on which there is no dispute. The present dispute is with reference to the second property sold by assessee. 2.1. During the year under consideration, assessee along with Coowner sold a property situated in Hakeempet. It was claimed that it was sold for Rs. 40,00,000/- and hence his 1/4th share therein amounting to Rs. 10,00,000/- was offered by him after deducting there from the cost of acquisition thereof. However, since the value of the said land as per SRO was Rs. 91,37,500/-, the Assessing Officer( AO )referring to Section 50C called upon the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the AO stating that assessee's arguments are not acceptable because the provisions u/s. 50C provide for adoption of assessed value by Registration Authorities, that assessee had not disputed the assessment made by the Registration authorities, added the difference between the SRO value and the value returned by assessee to the income returned. 3. Before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee has raised specific grounds (Ground Nos. 3 and 4) contending that AO ought to have referred the matter to valuation officer and not justified in his reasoning that assessee had not disputed the value made by registering authority. Ld.CIT(A) had upheld the action of AO by stating as under: "The assessing officer categorically mentioned that assessee had....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A) and has submitted that the matter may be referred to AO again to comply with the provisions, as assessee had not specifically requested the reference. 6. I have considered the rival contentions. It is true that the Co-ordinate Bench had upheld the order of Ld.CIT(A) wherein the assessee had specifically requested for reference to valuation officer and AO failed in his duty, in the above referred case of ACIT Vs. Lalitha Karan in ITA No. 1130/Hyd/2015 dt. 04-01-2017. In this case, however, the assessee had given reasons why the stamp value should not be adopted, but not made any specific request for reference to valuation officer. Even though specific objections were raised before the Ld.CIT(A), Ld.CIT(A) failed to consider the grounds....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of the AO, he preferred to dismiss the assessee's objections by simply mentioning that the assessee failed to make a formal prayer for referral of the property to the DVO for want of market valuation. In our opinion, such decision is not proper considering the 'principles of natural justice' and administration of justice to the appellant. Therefore, we find it relevant to accept the prayer of the assessee for setting aside the grounds raised before us to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication of the issues raised in accordance with law after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are set aside". 8. In the case of Raj Kumari Agarwal Vs. DCIT [150 ITD....