Court No. - 35
Case :- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 68 of 2017 Appellant :- Atul Kumar Jain Respondent :- The Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Suyash Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shubham Agarwal
Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard Sri Suyash Agrawal, learned Counsel for the assessee and Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned Counsel for the department.
This is an assessee's appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against an order of the Tribunal date 22.07.2010 for the Assessment Year 2003-04. The questions of law referred to are hereunder:-
"(A). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in adopting without any basis the cost of land on 01.04.1981 @ Rs.20 per sq. yard for the purpose of Long Term capital Gains, ignoring the report of Registered Valuer estimating value of land @ Rs.200/- per sq. yard as well as other evidences adduced before the authorities ?
(B). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in not considering that once the Assessing Authority has disbelieved the report of approved valuer relied by the assessee, he is duty bound to refer the case to the valuation cell as per Section 55A of the I.T. Act ?"
Learned Counsel for the assessee has sought to argue the question no.2 first and while doing so learned Counsel for the department in reply has relied on a decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Patel India (P) Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (1999) 63 TTJ Mumbai 19 a reference may be had to paragraph no.10 of the said judgement in which it has been clearly laid down that it is not mandatory to make a reference under Section 55A of the Act.
A reference is to be made under Section 55A of the Income Tax Act only when the circumstances as specified in the said Act are attracted that is when the assessing officer is of the opinion that the fair market value of the assets exceeds the value of the assets as claimed by the assessee and not in a reverse case as in the present case where the assessee claims the value by himself to be exceeding the fair market value as determined by the assessing officer. In the present case, the assessing officer has assessed the fair market value at rupees six whereas the assessee claims that the fair market value was 200.
The Tribunal while examining this part of the order has discussed that no reliable evidence was placed by the assessee on the basis of which it was claimed that the fair market value was approximately 200. There is no dispute on facts, the finding of the Tribunal is clear. The provisions of the Section are also clear. Clearly the provisions of Section 55A are not attracted in the present case.
The question no.2 is, therefore, answered infavour of the department and against the assessee.
In view of the answer given to the second question the first question also stands answered infavour of the department and against the assessee.
The appeal is dismissed as above. No costs.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 S.P.