TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1059
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 on 13.01.2021 declaring total income of Rs. 18,49,380/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify the purchase value of the property under the provision of section 56(2)(x) of the Act. In the course of assessment, the AO noticed that the assessee had purchased an agricultural land located at Block No. 329, at Village Vejalpore, Navsari along with three other persons and the purchase consideration contributed by the assessee @ 25% was Rs. 4,65,252/-. However, the stamp duty value of the land was Rs. 1,60,80,000/-. Accordingly, the AO had proposed to treat the proportionate stamp duty value as the purchase consider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 14,16,098/- u/s. 56(2)(x) of the I.T. Act 1961. 2. It is therefore prayed that the above addition made by the assessing officer and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) may please be deleted. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal. 5. Shri Rasesh Shah, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the status of the land as on date of transfer was agricultural land, which was not converted into non-agricultural land as on date of execution of sale deed. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ultural land. He, therefore, requested that the matter may be set aside to consider the objection of the assessee on the Valuer's report. 6. Per contra, Shri Ajay Uke, the Ld. SR-DR submitted that the provision of section 56(2)(x) of the Act is applicable in respect of transaction of any immovable property. Therefore, whether the land purchased by the assessee was agricultural or non-agricultural, had no bearing as the property purchased was certainly an immovable asset. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that since the purchase made by the assessee was at a price much less than the stamp duty value of the property, the AO had rightly made the addition under the provision of section 56(2)(x) of the Act. Regarding the valuation report, the Ld. AR s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty thousand rupees; and (ii) the amount equal to ten per cent of the consideration: Provided that where the date of agreement fixing the amount of consideration for the transfer of immovable property and the date of registration are not the same, the stamp duty value on the date of agreement may be taken for the purposes of this subclause : Provided further that the provisions of the first proviso shall apply only in a case where the amount of consideration referred to therein, or a part thereof, has been paid by way of an account payee cheque or an account payee bank draft or by use of electronic clearing system through a bank account or through such other electronic mode as may be prescribed, on or before the da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, in order to determine whether the sale transaction was exigible to capital gains tax. In the hand of the buyer this issue is not at all relevant. The land acquired by the assessee, whether agricultural or non-agricultural, was certainly an immovable asset. Thus, the provision of section 56(2)(x) of the Act is found to be squarely applicable in the present case. 9. The case laws relied upon by the assessee are found to be in connection with old provisions and pertain to section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. Rather in the case of Trilok Chand Sain (supra) relied upon by the assessee, the Co-ordinate bench of Jaipur Tribunal had held that provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b) refer to any immovable property and the same is not circumscribed or ....