Shabbir Bengali vs. ITO, Ward-37(1), Kolkata

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

During the assessment proceedings, the assessee disputed the purchase value/market value of the property as on 01.04.1981 estimated by the DVO at Rs.38.22 lakhs as against the value taken by the assessee at Rs.1,51,94,000/- as per report of the Registered Valuer. The Assessing Officer took the fair market value as on the date of sale at Rs.12,25,41,968/-. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, calculated the capital gains taking the purchase value/acquisition value as on 01.04.1981 at Rs.38.22 lakhs and the sale value at Rs.12.25 crores after giving the benefit of cost of indexation. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer. The assessee has submitted that the Assessing Officer at the time of referring the matter to the DVO was also supposed to get the fair market value of the property as on the date of sale also. The ld. Counsel has submitted that even the cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 as calculated by the registered valuer at Rs.1,51,94,000/- has not been taken into consideration either by the DVO or by the Assessing Officer. The ld. DR has submitted that the assessee did not dispute fair market value as on the date of sale. The assessee disputed the cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The sole issue raised in this appeal is relating to the addition made by the lower authorities u/s 50C of the Act on account of difference between collector rate as compared to sale consideration mentioned in the sale deeds in respect of property sold by the assessee along with others, wherein, the assessee had share of 11.277%.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• ACIT, Circle 28 (1), New Delhi vs. Maninder Singh

  Delhi Bench ‘E’ benchAY 2015-16Dismissed

• Tawfiqur Rahman

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2013-2014Allowed

• Sh. Vijay Rai Marwaha Vs. ACIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2020-21Partly Allowed

• Raghvendra Singh

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Allowed

• Murtuza Kothari vs. ITO, Ward-19(2)(2)

  Mumbai benchAY 2015-16Partly Allowed

• Rashmi Seventilal Vakharia vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai “D” Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed