| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 7484 (Mum-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 143(3)
So far as difference in agreed sale consideration reflected by assessee and stamp duty valuation was concerned, nothing had been brought on record by AO to prove that assessee was in receipt of higher sale consideration than reflected by assessee in its books of accounts. Clearly, provisions of section 43CA as well as section 50C were not applicable to the year under consideration. However, perusal of quantum assessment order would establish that either of these sections had not been invoked by AO. But, onus was on assessee to establish that agreement value received by assessee as sale consideration was the fair market value of the units sold by the assessee. Assessee remained unsuccessful in demonstrating the same. In such background, matter was restored back to AO to ascertain correct income of assessee earned from the concerned project and reframe assessment and assessee was directed to substantiate his claim, in this regard, including explanation for sale of flat at less than stamp duty valuation.
|
Assessment - Addition to income - Allegation of sale of units by developer at less than stamp duty valuation - Nothing brought by AO to prove receipt of higher sale consideration than that reflected in books but assessee also failed to establish that agreement value was FMV of the units sold
Assessee-builder carried out certain development project and sold the units at less than stamp duty valuation. AO computed estimated income earned by assessee from the said project after deducting aggregate expenditure crores from sale consideration as per stamp duty valuation.Held: So far as difference in agreed sale consideration reflected by assessee and stamp duty valuation was concerned, nothing had been brought on record by AO to prove that assessee was in receipt of higher sale consideration than reflected by assessee in its books of accounts. Clearly, provisions of section 43CA as well as section 50C were not applicable to the year under consideration. However, perusal of quantum assessment order would establish that either of these sections had not been invoked by AO. But, onus was on assessee to establish that agreement value received by assessee as sale consideration was the fair market value of the units sold by the assessee. Assessee remained unsuccessful in demonstrating the same. In such background, matter was restored back to AO to ascertain correct income of assessee earned from the concerned project and reframe assessment and assessee was directed to substantiate his claim, in this regard, including explanation for sale of flat at less than stamp duty valuation.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Matter remanded.
A.Y. : 2012-13
IN THE ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|