TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 348
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd of earning additional long term capital gain earned on sale of agriculture land. (2) It is therefore prayed that, the above addition of Rs. 12,96,927/- be deleted. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee file his return of income for assessment year 2012-13 declaring total income of Rs. 48570/-. The case was selected for a scrutiny. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 25th March 2015. During the assessment the assessing officer noted that during the period relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the assessee along with other her co-owner have sold agriculture land of admeasuring 17098, 50% of 34196 Square meter situated in Khajod Choryasi Surat, on 20.07.2011. The assessee has 1/3 shares in the said land i.e. 5699 Sq meter. The assessee received consideration of Rs. 1.22 Crore. The assessee calculated long term capital gain (LTCG) and adopted cost of land as on 01.04.1981 @ Rs. 110/- per Sq mtr. The assessee adopted value of land on the basis of report of Government Approved Valuer. The assessee also claimed exemption under section 54F. The assessing officer made investigation form the Sub- Registrar Surat about the value of land....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Hon'ble was rather High Court in case of CIT Versus Gauranginiben S Shodhan Ind. reported in (367 ITR 238) is squarely applicable on the facts of the present case. The learned AR of the assessee also relied on the following case laws. • JigneshKumar S Modi (HUF) and 6 others Vs ITO (ITA No. 544 to 550/Srt/2018, • CIT Vs Gaurangiben S. Shodhan [2014] 224 Taxman 253 (Guj), • CIT Vs Pooja Prints (2014) 224 Taxman 22 (Bombay), • Mahadevi Mohanbhai Naik Vs ITO ( ITA No.82/Ahd/2016) and • Sonali Roy Vs PCIT (ITA 1329/Kol/2017). 5. The learned AR for the assessee submits that in view of the decision of jurisdictional High Court in CIT Versus Gauranginiben S Shodhan (supra), the issue of validity of reference under section 55A(a) may kindly be addressed first as not in accordance with the law and in case it is held that reference to the DVO is not in accordance with law, the additions based on such reference be deleted in such event the other contention raised before the lower authorities would become academic. 6. On the other hand the learned Senior department representative for the revenue strongly supported the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....during the financial year 2011-12 relevant the assessment year 2012-13, the amended provisions of section 55A(a) would not be applicable and one shall be guided by the erstwhile provisions of section 55A(a) of the Act. It was also held that in order to refer the matter to the valuation officer as per under erstwhile provisions of section 55A(a) of the Act would be applicable. Further, the Assessing Officer should form an opinion that value so claimed by assessee is less than its Fair Market Value (FMV). Only in such a scenario, the value so claimed by assessee is less than its Fair Market Value in the opinion of Assessing Officer, matter can be referred to valuation officer. In a scenario, where the value so claimed by the assessee is more than its fair market value, the matter could not be referred to the valuation officer. It was ultimately held that the Assessing Officer was not empowered to refer the matter to the valuation officer, even as per the erstwhile provisions of section 55A(a) prior to amendment by the Finance Act, 2012. 10. Considering the decision of Co-ordinate Bench on similar set of facts, which is based on the ratio of decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its that the assessee during the pendency of appeal before first appellate authority was out of India. The assessee in Form-35 i.e. in appeal form before learned Commissioner (Appeals) provided the address of his AR. No notice on the address provided in Form-35, was sent to the assessee. The assessee has not received notice of hearing. Only two notices were allegedly sent by ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The ld AR for the assessee submits that the assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed, if the assessee is given opportunity of hearing on merit. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not considered the merit of the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. 15. The ld. AR for the assessee further submits that the assessee vide her application dated 08.01.2021 has raised additional grounds of appeal. The additional ground of appeal is purely legal in nature. No new facts are required to be brought on record. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that the appeal of the assessee may be adjudicated by the Tribunal instead of remanding the matter to learned Commissioner (Appeals). In support of his submissions the ld AR for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon'ble Su....