TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 489
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 26.03.2022 for the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: "Gr.No.1 "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 73,65,000 on long term capital gain on sale of land by applying sec.50C(1) without referring the matter to DVO for valuation of such land u/s.50C(2) when 'actual sale consideration' is less than the 'stamp duty value', matter is liable to be referred to DVO for valuation; action of the AO/CIT(A) without following procedure laid down in sec.50C(2) is unsustainable in law and is liable to be set aside to file of AO for r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ortal on 23.03.2021, the assessee had sold the subject property for a consideration of Rs. 19.06 lacs, whereas, the market value of the same was Rs. 73.65 lacs. The A.O observed that the difference in the Fair Market Value (FMV) and the sale consideration disclosed in the sale deed amounted to Rs. 54.59 lacs. As the assessee had failed to come forth with any explanation, therefore, the A.O held the entire amount of sale consideration of Rs. 73,65,000/- as his unexplained capital gain income u/s.45 of the Act. Accordingly, the A.O vide his order passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 26.03.2022 after making the aforesaid addition determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 73,65,000/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tify his claim that where there is a difference between the actual sale consideration of an immovable property and the FMV/segment rate adopted by the stamp valuation authority, then, the A.O before drawing any adverse inferences is obligated to make a reference to the Valuation Cell, had relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Siliguri (2015) 372 ITR 83 (Cal.). Also, the Ld. AR had drawn support from the orders of the ITAT, 'SMC' Bench, Raipur in the case of Narendra Kumar Lunia Vs. DCIT, ITA No.202/RPR/2014, dated 22.09.2016 and that of the ITAT, 'Division Bench', Raipur in the case of Ram Saran Yadav Vs. ITO, ITA No.159/RPR/2017, dated 26.07.2022. Alt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000/ 3. Smt. Sunita Kadam. Shai Vihar Sarkanda, Bilaspur 3,94,000/- 12,56,000/- 8,62,000/- 4. Smt. Manisha Mishra. Rathore Chaal Sarkanda, Bilaspur 3,25,000/- 14,50,000/- 11,25,000/ Total 19,06,000/- 73,65,000/ 54,59,000/- The above sold properties was found as capital asset within the meaning of Sec.2(14) of the Act and it was chargeable u/s 45 of the 'Act' in the hands of the assessee for the A.Y.2016-17. However, the assessee not has offered any Capital Gain arises from the transfer of the above quoted land. Because he has not filed his return of income for the year under consideration, Further, as per section 50C of the Act, the aggregate market value of the above ment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... A.O had grossly erred in treating the entire amount of sale consideration as his undisclosed capital gain u/s. 45 of the Act. We are of the view that though the assessee had not participated in the appellate proceedings, but the CIT(Appeals) ought to have adverted to the facts involved in the case before him in the backdrop of the grounds based on which the impugned addition was assailed before him and adjudicated the said respective issues vide a speaking order instead of dismissing the same for want of prosecution. 11. As observed by us hereinabove, the CIT(Appeals) had disposed off the appeal for non-prosecution and had failed to apply his mind to the issues which did arise from the impugned order and was assailed by the assessee bef....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Sec. 251(1)(a) and (h) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-s. (2) of s. 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under s. 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dis....