TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 924
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....55,33,300/- by adopting circle rate as sale value of property without considering the ground realities. Therefore, the same is unlawful, on surmises and unjustified because it is not based on any tangible material/Evidence. 2. Whether the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in upholding the assessment order passed by Ld. A.O. making additions of Rs. 55,33,300/- by not considering the actual sale consideration as sale value and instead adopting circle rate as sale value of property without considering the written submissions along with documentary evidences filed by the assessee. 3. Whether the Ld. CIT (A) was justified by upholding the assessment order passed by Ld. A.O. making additions of Rs. 55,33,300/- without receipt of the val....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f scrutiny assessment proceeding, the Assessee submitted that there were encroachment on the land vide letter dated 06.10.2017 before the Assessing Officer. The statement of the buyer was recorded u/s 131 of the Act on 06.10.2017 by the Assessing Officer wherein the buyer affirmed the encroachment on the subject land. The encroachment was also confirmed by the broker Mr. Pradeep Bajaj who was a third party in the aforementioned transaction. After due enquiries, the Assessing Officer has taxed the amount of Rs. 55,33,300/- on account of difference in the stamp duty value and also disallowed the commission of Rs. 4,50,000/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 5. The submissions of the assessee before the ld. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unjust and without considering the objections raised by the assessee vide letter dated 03.05.2019 and also send through the speed post dated 04.05.2019 with documentary evidence objecting the additional valuation of civil structure taken in preliminary report as well as prevailing circle rate for the adjoining area. e) However in this valuation reports vide Page 1 Para B) the following statement is highly incorrect and not acceptable: "Whereas the assessee did not state his objections in writing/verbal in person to the proposed estimate". f) In this regard, we draw your kind attention to the letter dated 03.05.2019 addressed to the valuation officer raising our objection and is self-explanatory. It is factually correct but....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epresent the fair market value prevailing in the year when sale transaction has taken place in the year of sale. For this we draw the attention by enclosing the documentary evidence of revised circle rate of the same area for the year 2018 which are placed at Rs. 26,500 per square yard issued by the district collector Faridabad. The Estate authority have downgraded the circle rate from 30000 to 26500 per sq yard in the subsequent year reflect that the circle rate issued in 2015 and adopted by the valuation officers were not fair and correct to the prevailing market rates. j) The appellate assessee has raised the objection to the additional Valuation made on account of building structure value placed at Rs. 13,99,062/-. This valuati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ness of a DVO's can indeed be challenged. It is, however, also Important to note that the provisions of section 23A(6) of the Wealth Tax Act shall, with necessary modifications, also apply in the present context- as has been provided in section 50C(2) itself. Section 23A(6) of the Wealth Tax Act provides as follows: If the valuation of any asset is objected to in an appeal under clause (a) or clause (1) of sub- section (1), the commissioner (Appeals) shall,- (a) In case where such valuation has been made by a valuation officer under section 16A, give such valuation officer an opportunity of being heard. (b) In any other case on request being made in this behalf by the assessing officer, give an opportunity of ....