TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n sustaining the addition of Rs. 84,87,500/- by adoption of alleged value under section 50 C of the Act. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in rendering a unsubstantiated finding that no reference under section 50 C (2) was sought by the appellant prior to completion of assessment proceedings. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred by contradicting his finding on non application of section 50 C (2) while recording at page 6 of his appellate order, the specific claim of the assessee to make a reference to the valuation cell. 4. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in ignoring the binding jurisdictional High Court decision on mandatory....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee is an individual and proprietor of M/s. S.K. Enterprises, engaged in commission agent business, filed his return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 on 27.10.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 52,03,550/-. During the financial year relevant to assessment year 2015-16, the assessee has sold a property at Egmore for apparent consideration of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- and admitted long term capital gain of Rs. 46,56,159/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO obtained report from Sub-Registrar and found that stamp duty value of the property was fixed at Rs. 12,500/- per sq.ft., as against Rs. 8,707/- per sq.ft., declared by the assessee. The AO on the basis of information obtained from the office of Sub-Registrar, issued a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... him, the assessee has shown consideration for transfer of property, which is less than market rate of the property fixed as per stamp duty authorities and hence, by taking note of the information collected from office of the Sub-Registrar, adopted Rs. 12,500/- per sq.ft., and recomputed capital gain in terms of Section 50C(1) of the Act and made addition of Rs. 84,87,500/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee has reiterated his submissions made before the AO along with the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Appadurai Vijayaraghavan, 369 ITR 485 and submitted that market value fixed for payment of stamp duty is not sacrosanct....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar and hence, it is nothing but reference to another authority for valuation of property and hence, there is no error in the reasons given by the AO to adopt value of the property as per guideline value fixed for payment of stamp duty in terms of Section 50C(1) of the Act. 5. The ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition made by the AO by adoption of alleged fair market value of the property based on the value fixed by the stamp duty authorities in terms of Section 50C(1) of the Act, without appreciating the fact that when the assessee had disputed the value determined by the AO, then it is the duty of the AO to refer the valuation to the Departmental Valuation Officer in terms of Section 50C(2) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lue arrived at by the stamp duty authorities and hence, the AO has adopted value determined by the stamp duty authorities in terms of Section 50C(1) of the Act and recomputed long term capital gain from sale of property. The assessee has disputed the value assessable or assessed by stamp duty authorities for payment of stamp duty and argued that property was situated in a lane adjacent to Victoria Crescent Road and the road connecting property is only 3 feet width and hence, value fixed by the State Government for property situated in Victoria Crescent Road cannot be applied to the impugned property. The assessee had also tried to justify the value shown in the registered document by obtaining a valuation report from the registered valuer. ....