M/s. Sonawala Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. The JCIT (OSD)-4(3), Mumbai
[Citation -2016-LL-0923-212]

Citation 2016-LL-0923-212
Appellant Name M/s. Sonawala Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent Name The JCIT (OSD)-4(3), Mumbai
Court ITAT-Mumbai
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 23/09/2016
Assessment Year 2009-10
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags opportunity of being heard • market value
Bot Summary: The assessee has raised the following grounds: 1) The Commissioner of Income Tax-8 hereinafter referred to as CIT(A) erred in confirming the values of plot nos. The Appellants submit that since the properties are fully encroached by the protected tenant/ illegal tenants the consideration received by them of Rs. 2 ITA No.683/M/2014 50,00,000/- represents true market value and pray that the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax-4(3), Mumbai be directed to accept the same in computing the capital gains. Without prejudice to the above the CIT erred in not accepting the Appellants contention that since the value of Rs.46,80,540 determined by the DVO for plot no.509 is less that the value ofRs.87,03,372 computed by the stamp authorities, the same should be adopted in computing capital gains as per section 50C(3) of the Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits that ground No. 1 regarding confirming the values of the plot No. 506 and 509 arrived at by the DVO in computing the capital gains is not pressed. However coming to the alternative ground, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the value of Plot No. 509 determined by the Stamp authorities is less than the value computed by DVO and therefore, the value as per stamp authorities should be adopted in computing capital gains as per the provisions of Sec. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding this issue in the light of the provisions of Sec. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA No.683/Mum/2014 ( Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Sonawala Industries JCIT (OSD)-4(3), Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 135, Sheikh Memon Street, Mumbai-400 020 Zaveri Bazar, Mumbai -400 002 PAN/GIR No. AADCS 0760M (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Jitendra Jain Respondent by: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy Date of Hearing :26.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement :23.09.2016 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, JM: This appeal is filed by assessee against order of Ld. CIT(A)-8, Mumbai dated 09.12.2013 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. 2. assessee has raised following grounds: 1) Commissioner of Income Tax-8 (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] erred in confirming values of plot nos. 506 and 509 of Rs. 1,59,96,000/- arrived at by DVO in computing capital gains. Appellants submit that since properties are fully encroached by protected tenant/ illegal tenants consideration received by them of Rs. 2 ITA No.683/M/2014 50,00,000/- represents true market value and pray that Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)-4(3), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as JCIT) be directed to accept same in computing capital gains. Without prejudice to above CIT (A) erred in not accepting Appellants contention that since value of Rs.46,80,540 determined by DVO for plot no.509 is less that value ofRs.87,03,372 computed by stamp authorities, same should be adopted in computing capital gains as per section 50C(3) of Act. Appellants pray that JCIT be given suitable directions in matter . 3. Ld. Counsel for assessee at outset submits that ground No. 1 regarding confirming values of plot No. 506 and 509 arrived at by DVO in computing capital gains is not pressed. Therefore, this ground raised by assessee is dismissed as not pressed. 4. However coming to alternative ground, Ld. Counsel for assessee submits that value of Plot No. 509 determined by Stamp authorities is less than value computed by DVO and therefore, value as per stamp authorities should be adopted in computing capital gains as per provisions of Sec. 50C(3) of Act. Therefore, Ld. Counsel for assessee submits that matter may be restored to file of Assessing Officer for deciding this issue in light of provisions of Sec. 50C(3) of Act. 5. On query from Bench to Ld. Departmental Representative whether matter should go back to Assessing Officer to decide in view of provisions of Sec. 50C(3), he has no serious objection. 3 ITA No.683/M/2014 6. On hearing both parties, we are inclined to restore this matter to file of Assessing Officer to decide issue in light of provisions of Sec. 50C(3) in respect of property in Plot No. 509. Thus, we restore issue to file of Assessing Officer to decide issue afresh in accordance with law and as per provisions of Sec. 50C(3) of Act after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to assessee. 7. In result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 23rd September, 2016. Sd/- Sd/- (RAJENDRA) (C.N. PRASAD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 23rd September, 2016 Rj , Sr. PS Copy of Order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent. 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai M/s. Sonawala Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. JCIT (OSD)-4(3), Mumbai
Report Error