Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (6) TMI 1680

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income on 21.3.2014 declaring total income at Rs.2,72,857/-. Assessment year involved is 2012-13. Thereafter, the return was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. On verification of the details furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee along other four co-owners have sold land situated at survey no.193 and 194, TP Scheme No.32 (Gota), F.P.No.126 admeasuring 10121 sq.meters at Gota, Ahmedabad for Rs.4.50 crores on 30.5.2011. Assessee's share thus came to Rs.90,00,000/- being 1/5th of the share. For the purpose o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted that newly amended provisions is not applicable to the case of the assessee, as this provision is applicable from 1.7.2012, meaning thereby, this amendment is applicable from the assessment year 2013-14. Since action of both the authorities below was not in accordance with the provisions of the Act, their orders may be reversed and the claim of the assessee may be allowed. He also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gauranginiben S. Shodhan, 45 taxmann.com 356 (Guj) On the other hand, the ld.DR supported the orders of the Revenue authorities. 6. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that the dispute is with regard to calculation of c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....valuation of capital asset to a Valuation Officer-- (a) in a case where the value of the asset as claimed by the assessee is in accordance with the estimate made by a registered valuer, if the [Assessing] Officer is of opinion that the value so claimed is less than its fair market value" xxxx xxxx xxxx 7. From the above provision, we note that the Assessing Officer can refer the valuation of property to a Valuation Officer in a case where the value claimed by the assessee based on the registered valuation report is less than its fair market value. However in the case before us there is no dispute that the fair market value as declared by assessee is not less than the value determined by the DVO. Thus, the valuation dete....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "8. The contention of the revenue that in view of the amendment to Section 55A(a) of the Act in 2012 by which the words "is less then the fair market value" is substituted by the words " "is at variance with its fair market value" is clarifactory and should be given retrospective effect. This submission is in face of the fact that the 2012 amendment was made effective only from 1 July 2012. The Parliament has not given retrospective effect to the amendment. Therefore, the law to be applied in the present case is Section 55A(a) of the Act as existing during the period relevant to the Assessment Year 2006-07. At the relevant time, very clearly reference could be made to Departmental Valuation Officer only if the value declared by the as....