TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1328
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessment year 2014-15. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - "i. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition made by assessing officer U/S 143(3) of the I.T. Act of Rs. 14,34,500. ii. The learned CIT (A) has erred in not considering the detailed submission of the assessee made during the appellate proceedings. iii. The learned CIT (A) has erred in not considering the submission made by the assessee during appellate proceedings as will be clearly evident from the order of CIT (A) where in no rebuttal /discussion whatsoever of the submission made by the assessee during appellant proceeding as such the order of the CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ngly, the purchase consideration was agreed of Rs. 98 lacs for Flat No. 701 and Rs. 1,17,00,000/- for Flat No.702. The assessee submitted that he paid Rs. 50,000/- in cash as a booking amount. Accordingly, the assessee claimed that as the booking and allotment were done in the Financial Year 2011-12, the market value of the property should be considered as per the Ready Reckoner of the year 2012. 4. The Assessing Officer ("AO"), vide order dated 26.12.2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that there is no evidence on record to prove that the agreed consideration or part thereof was paid by any mode other than cash on or before the date of agreement for the transfer of immovab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation or part thereof in a mode other than cash on or before the date of agreement for transfer of the immovable properties. 8. We have considered the submission of both sides and perused the material available on record. In the present case, there is no dispute regarding the fact that the assessee purchased two residential flats in Olive Apartment, Santacruz, Mumbai. During the year under consideration, the stamp duty value as on the date of agreement was more than the value as per the agreement. The details of the properties purchased by the assessee are as follows: - Properties Agreement Value Stamp duty value as on dated agreement Difference Flat No.701 98,00,000/- 1,01,29,500/- 3,29,500/- Flat No.702 1,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tment. I say the Builder has not obtained occupation Certificate till date. I further say that during the assessment 2014, I had requested to appoint and hereby refer the matter to Department Valuation Officer (DVO). I am making this affidavit to be produced before the concerned authorities regarding the above said facts." 10. We find that similar submissions were made before the learned CIT(A), as noted at page 4 of the impugned order, wherein the assessee submitted the deficiencies in the purchased flats like it is a tenant rehabilitation project, surrounded by the slum, not having proper approach road, incomplete and unfurnished work, occupation certificate not received and because of which no water connecti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which is less than stamp duty value of the property by an amount exceeding Rs. 50,000/-, then the stamp duty value of such property as it exceeding such consideration shall be chargeable to income tax under the head "income from other sources". The first proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) provides that where the stamp duty of the immovable property as referred to in sub-clause (b) is disputed by the assessee on the grounds as mentioned in section 50C(2) of the Act, the AO may refer the valuation of such property to a Valuation Officer. In this regard, it is relevant to note the provisions of section 50C(2) of the Act, which reads as follows: - "(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), where- (a) the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessed, if it were referred to such authority for the purposes of the payment of stamp duty." 13. In the present case, it cannot be disputed that the value adopted by the stamp duty authority exceeds the value of the residential flats purchased by the assessee on the date of transfer and the value so adopted is also not in dispute in any appeal, revision or reference before any Authority, Court or High Court. Thus, both the conditions of section 50C(2) of the Act are fulfilled in the present case. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the AO erred in not referring the valuation of the residential flats to the DVO. Further, the impugned order also suffers from the same vice as despite recording submission of the assessee in this....