2012 (3) TMI 699

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssing the impugned order directing the Assessing Officer to recompute the income on sale of industrial units by substituting the value adopted by the Stamp Duty Authority as the full value of consideration wherever the Stamp Duty valuation is higher. 2) The CIT failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer had specifically applied his mind to the issue of computation of income arising on transfer of the industrial units and whether provision of section 50C can be applied to gains arising on transfer of depreciable assets which have to be computed u/s. 50 was debatable issue on which view were possible and therefore assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act was not maintainable. 3) The CIT erred in applying the provisions of sect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n sale of the assets by substituting the value adopted by the Stamp Duty authorities on the full value of computation in place of apparent consideration, wherever the stamp duty is higher". 6. Against the assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 263 and passing the order "directing the AO to recomputed the sale of industrial units by substituting the value adopted by the Stamp Duty Authority on the full value of consideration wherever the Stamp Duty valuation is higher", the assessee co. is before the ITAT. 7. Before us the AR of the assessee co. submitted that the issue taken up by the CIT u/s. 263, was properly dealt with by the AO before he passed the order u/s. 143(3), dated 11.12.2008. The AR further submitted that AO having taken one pos....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 10. During the course of hearing, the Bench queried the AR about the Special Bench decision on the issue of applicability of section 50C on section 50. The AR responded that the issue, since it went to the Special Bench, itself proves that it is not for free from dispute. He further submitted that without prejudice to the fact that issue went to the Special Bench, but at the relevant time, when the AO completed the assessment and accepted the stand of assessee, there was no controversy and therefore, at the relevant time the opinion of the CIT was simply a change of opinion, which would invalidate the initiation of section 263. 11. The issue before us are two fold, i.e. whether the AO applied his mind on the issue of applicability o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble Delhi High Court in para no. 12 has referred to the distinction between "lack if inquiry" and "inadequate inquiry" what we found here in the matter before us that there can be an issue of "inadequate inquiry" but is certainly not the case of "lack of inquiry". The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that any inquiry, even inadequate that would not by itself give occasion to the CIT to pass order u/s. 263, merely because he has different opinion in matter. It is only in case of "lack of inquiry" that such course of action would be open. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court referred to the case of CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (Bombay) reported in 203 ITR 108, wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held, CIT cannot revise order merely because he disagrees....