2019 (4) TMI 705

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ls of the assessees. 2. Solitary substantial grievance of both the appellants relates to determination of long term capital gain assessable in their hands on transfer of assets. 3. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. 4. As facts emerge out from the record, both the appellants are co-owners of the land bearing RS/Block No.315, 312, 306, Village Gorva, Vadodara. They have sold this piece of land during the accounting year relevant to this assessment order. The sale consideration has been received as under: i) Shardaben Chimanbhai Patel Rs. 53,50,000/- ii) Sureshbhai Chimanbhai Patel Rs. 53,50,000/- iii) Late Hansaben Shankarbhai Rs. 67,50,000/- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... If the value was more than the value before 1.7.2012, the ld.AO cannot make a reference to the DVO for determining fair market value of the property as on 1.4.1981. For buttressing his contention, he relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gauranginiben S. Shodhan Indl. Vs. CIT, 45 taxmann.com 356 (Guj) and order of ITAT in the case of Shri Devendra Rasiklal Shah, ITA No.2027/Ahd/2015. He placed on record copies both these decisions. 7. On due consideration of the above facts, we find that the ITAT in the case of Shri Devendra Rasiklal Shah (supra) has considered judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional high Court in the case of Gauranginiben S. Shodhan (supra) and has held that if the value declared....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ith effect from 1.7.2012, the expression now used in clause (a) of section 55A is "is at variance with its fair market value". The situation may, therefore, be different after 1.7.2012. We are, however, concerned with the period prior thereto. Clause (b) of section 55 A is in two parts and permits a reference to DVO if the Assessing Officer is of the opinion that (i) the fair market value of the asset exceeds the value of the asset so claimed by the assessee by more than such percentage of the value of the asset so claimed or by more than such amount as may be prescribed in this behalf; or (ii) that having regard to the nature of the asset and other relevant circumstances, it is necessary so to do. Sub-clause(i) of clause (b) also ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the asset exceeds the value of the asset as claimed by the assessee by more than such percentage or by more than such an amount as may be prescribed; or (ii) having regard to the nature of the asset and other relevant circumstances, it is necessary to make such a reference." 17. In the result, we see no reason to interfere. However, we have given our independent reasons and should not be seen to have confirmed the reasonings adopted by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment. Tax Appeal is dismissed. 11. The Hon'ble High Court has specifically held that prior to the amendment in section 55A with effect from 01.07.2012 in a case, the value of the assets claimed by the assessee is in accordance with the estimate made....