TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 955
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling the appeal. Your Honours, In my case, the Ld. C.I.T.(Appeals), Siliguri passed order u/s. 250 of the Act dated 06.08.2019 for A.Y. 2014-15 confirming the addition of Rs.54,84,714/- (wrongly mentioned as Rs.54,54,714 in the appellate order) made by the A.O. on the alleged ground of non-disclosure of actual LTCG arising from sale of a jointly held land measuring 71 kathas. The said order was received by me on 20.08.2019 and the appeal is filed before this Hon'ble Tribunal on 09.03.2021, resulting in a delay of 507 days beyond the prescribed due date for the following reasons. 1) The said appellate order was given to Mr. B.K. Pradhan, A.R., who was representing my case before the department, sometime in the 2nd week of September, 2019 for future course of action in the matter. He assured me that immediately after the Durga Puja is over by 8th October, 2019, he himself will go to Kolkata for consultation and opinion of a Senior Lawyer and the appeal will be filed within the due date. 2) Thereafter Mr. Pradhan did not inform me anything and I also forgot to enquire from him. It was sometime in March, 2020 that I contacted Mr. Pradhan and then only came to know that neithe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces stated above were beyond the control of the appellant and, therefore, there was no mala fide intention behind not filing the appeal within the prescribed time; because in that case your appellant would be the sufferer by paying additional income-tax on such an income which is not taxable at all under the Act. Therefore when the delay is not voluntary, the provisions of condonation of delay should be liberally applied. 9) The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors.,[1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) held that the Courts should have a pragmatic and liberal approach while* considering the petition for condonation of delay. Their Lordships have also held that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice should be preferred. In support of condonation of delay for bona fide reasons beyond the control of the appellant, the appellant would also rely on the order of jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Vinod Asarwal vs Pr CTT (2018) 61 ITR (Trib) 598 (Kol). 10) The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Royal Airways Ltd. vs. ADIT, [2006] 98 ITD 259 (Del) condoned the delay of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an 150 days. It should not be condoned. 5. On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee has not adopted the de lay as a strategy to fight his income-tax litigation. On account of bonafide belief, this delay has happened. It is also observed that the assessee will not gain by delaying his appeal. In other words, that this delay has not been adopted as a dilatory strategy of income-tax litigation. Therefore, we allow this application and condone the delay. We proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 6. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal. However, his whole grievance revolves around a single issue namely, ld. Assessing Officer has erred in determining the long-term capital gain assessable in the hands of assessee at Rs.66,19,249/-. 7. Brief facts of the case are that 71 cottahs of land situated within the revenue estate of Mouza of Panchanoi, R.S. Plot No. 207, P.S. Pradhan Nagar, District- Darjeeling was owned by the assessee as a co-owner. His share of the property was 28.16%. The assessee entered into a Development Agreement alongwith co-owners with M/s. Arjun Grace Home s on 28.11.2013 and they handed over the possess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quate machinery provision to the assesses which contemplates that in case an assessee disputes adoption of stamp duty valuation for the purpose of deeming full sale consideration in order to calculate capital gain, then a reference would be made to the D.V.O. for determining the fair market value of the capital asset as on the date of transfer. Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention towards page no. 66 of the paper book, where report of District Valuation Officers of the Income Tax Department is available. Taking us through this report, he pointed out that a reference was made by the ITO of the assessee to the DVO on 19.12.2018. This report was submitted to the ld. Assessing Officer by the DVO on 26.04.2019, but by the time the ld. Assessing Officer had already passed the assessment order. However, this report was available to the ld. CIT(Appeals) and he could have taken cognizance of the value determined by the DVO while determining the full sale value for computing the capital gain taxable in the hands of the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further drew our attention towards page no. 8 of his written submission, wherein he has provided a computation required to be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch specified entity under sub-section (4A) of section 45 which is attributable to the capital asset being transferred, calculated in the prescribed manner. x x x x x x x "Special provision f or full value of consideration in certain cases:- 50C: Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the "stamp valuation authority") for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed or assessable shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer: Provided that where the date of the agreement fixing the amount of consideration and the date of registration for the transfer of the capital asset are not the same, the value adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority on the date of agreement may be taken for the purposes of computing full value of consideration for such transfer: Provided further....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 50C provides that full value of consideration provided in section 48 would be change d and it would be deemed equivalent to the amount on which stamp duty has been paid by the parties on a transaction of transfer of a capital asset. However, in order to safeguard the interest of the assessee, sub-clause (2) has been provided in section 50C. The basic purpose of this sub-section is that in a given case, stamp duty is being levied on a higher amount, then the actual market price of that asset available. It can be explained by way of simple example, namely an asset is being valued as at Rs.100/- for the purpose of charging of stamp duty, however, in the market, its real value is only Rs.80/-, this stamp duty charged on the value of Rs.100/- is roughly only 4 to 8% (depending upon the rate in a particular State). This amount may not affect substantially to the parties transacting the transaction, but for the purpose of income-tax, the tax rate is higher and further it can attract penalty for concealment, prosecution, etc. A party can dispute the determination of alleged full sale consideration on redeeming fiction provided in section 50C for the purpose of taxation. In such situ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs.2,35,05 ,87 5/- on 28.11.2013 and on the same date the Powe r of Attorney was executed where the mark et value f or the same land was taken at Rs.1 ,56 ,72,522/-. 3. That the Assessing Officer while making the assessment has taken the higher market valuation for enhancing the income of assessee. 4. That the assessee being not satisfied by the market valuation determined by the Registrar of land requested the Assessing Officer to ref er the matter to the valuation cell f or proper valuation of the proper ty. 5. That now the valuation office has finalized the valuation of the property Rs.1,86,94 ,15 4/- as per section 50(c)(2) of the I.T . Act, 1 961. 4. Decision:- I have perused the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and assessment order on this issue. On merit, it is seen that the ld. A.O. has added an amount of Rs.54,54,7 14/ - as the appellant failed to disclose the actual LTCG arising from sale of landed property in his return of income. There was no satisfactory explanation give n by the appellant during assessment proceedings and also during appellate proceedings. Hence, the ground of appeal furnish ed by the appellant does not have any meri t. Accordingly, the a....