TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 1331
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... against calculated fair market value at Rs. 2,32,800/- without taking expert opinion. 3. During the year under consideration, the assessee had sold some lands at village Barnala Kalan on different dates and worked out capital gain as under : Sale Consideration Rs. 99,63,600/- Less: indexed cost (835217 X 632 / 100) Rs. 52,78,571/- Long term capital gain Rs. 46,84,429/- Less deduction u/s 54B Rs. (gains invested in capital gain account) 46,84,444/- Balance Long Term capital gain taxable Rs. Nil 3(i) The value of the land as on 01.04.1981 was taken on the basis of valuation made by a registered valuer. The Assessing Officer noticed from the valuation report that the valuation was done at 3.5 times of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r for computing capital gain whereas section 142A clearly stipulates that reference is to be made to the Valuation Officer and even section 50C prescribes that the valuation may be sought from the District -Valuation Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'DVO). Reliance has been placed on the judgements of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the cases of Chandra Narain Chaudhri in ITA No. 287 of 2011 and Raj Kumari Vimla Devi (279 ITR 360) and Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Chandani Bhochar (223 ITR 510). It has also been contended that it was a prime land and the sale rate of this land was much more than the rate at which other lands were registered in that area. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeals) considering submission of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erefore, the contention of the Ld. Counsel that the matter should have been referred to the Valuation Officer u/s 50C is also not correct and is accordingly rejected. 3.3.2 The appellant has relied upon a number of judgements, which are discussed below : i) Chandra Narain Chaudhry (supra) In this case, the value of the property was adopted as per the valuation made by the stamp valuation authority. In first appeal, the argument of the assessee that it was a distress sale and so the valuation made by registered valuer was accepted by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A). The Hon'ble Tribunal had confirmed the findings of ld. CIT(Appeals). The department field further appeal before the Hon'ble High Court and High Cour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r to decide the valuation of the capital asset in accordance with law as explained by us in this judgement. Thus, the Hon'ble Court had merely held that the Assessing Officer has to apply his mind on the Validity of objection of the assessee regarding the value assessed by the stamp valuation authority, if it exceeds the fair market value. In the instant case, the issue is regarding Valuation as on 01.04.1981 for computing the indexed cost and so the issue here is entirely different to the issue decided by the Hon'ble Court. The ratio of this judgement is accordingly not applicable to the case of the Appellant (ii) Chandani Bhochar (supra) In this case, the Assessing Officer applied the provisions of Section 50C for c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....different and this judgement is of no help to the appellant. 3:3.3 The Assessing Officer has computed the cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 by applying the rate mentioned by the registered valuer in his valuation report i.e. Rs. 24,000/- per kanal, The registered valuer has mentioned in his report that it was expected that the price of land in that area must have been 4 to 5 times higher than what was shown in the registration deed, but to be on the safer side he was adopting it to be at 3.5 times of what was shown in the registration deed. At the outset, it may be mentioned that there was no scientific/rational basis for the registered valuer to take the rate of 3.5 times of the rate of registration. Moreover, if he was taking the co....