Shri Pravin V. Vora, 101, Sudama Kutir, Station Road,Bhayander(W) Vs. The nACIT, Circle 2, Thane
January, 23rd 2015
, Û `'
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI
[^ ] , Û Û] ãá, ¢
BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
( [ [ / Assessment Year : 2008-09
Shri Pravin V. Vora, / The nACIT, Circle 2,
101, Sudama Kutir, Thane
. / . / PAN/GIR No. : AAIPV 8198G
( /Appellant) .. (× / Respondent)
/ Appellant by: Shri Sanjay Parikh
× /Respondent by: Shri Akhilendra Yadav
/ Date of Hearing :22.01.2015
/Date of Pronouncement :22.01.2015
/ O R D E R
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld.
CIT(A)II, Thane dt.5.10.2011 pertaining to A.Y.2008-09.
2. The assessee has raised three substantive grounds of appeal. By
ground No.1, the assessee has assailed the assessment order claiming that
it was in violation of the principles of natural justice and the Ld. CIT(A)
grossly erred in confirming such assessment order.
3. The assessee is an individual and is a partner in various firms
namely M/s. Sudama & Sons, M/s. Sudama Builder, M/s. Sudama Estate
2 ITA No. 514/M/2012
Agency & M/s. Sudama Ind. Development Co. The assessee is also
derived income from Long Term Capital Gain and income from other
3.1. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing
Officer noticed that the assessee has entered into an agreement for
development. The total consideration was Rs. 55 lakhs. The matter was
referred to the Stamp Valuation authorities. The Stamp Valuation
authorities vide letter dt. 4.8.2010 sent the Ready Reckoner rates. The AO
found that the rates prevailing during the period in consideration was
6300 per Sq.ft. and the total consideration was worked out at Rs. 1.58
crores. As the AO found that the assessee has under valued the property
by 65%, the matter was referred to the Government Valuation Officer for
determination of fair market value. The Valuation Officer vide letter dt.
22.12.2010 has estimated the consolidated value of the properties under
consideration at Rs. 1,49,97,000/-. The AO recomputed the Long Term
Capital Gain by taking sale consideration as per the Valuation Officer's
report and the net Long Term Capital Gain was recomputed at Rs.
4. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) but without
5. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee claimed that the
Valuation Officer has violated the principle of natural justice by not
affording reasonable opportunity of being heard before determining the
fair market value of the property. To substantiate, the Ld. Counsel drew
our attention to the notice issued by the Valuation Officer and the order
u/s. 55A of the Act passed by the Valuation Officer.
3 ITA No. 514/M/2012
6. In turn, the Ld. Departmental Representative supported the
7. We have gone through the assessment order and the order of the
First appellate authority and the relevant documentary evidences brought
to our notice. We find that the notice u/s.55A of the Act is dt.22.12.2010
by which the assessee was asked to appear before the Valuation Officer
on or before 29.12.2010. In his order u/s. 55A of the Act, the Valuation
Officer refers to his notice dt. 22.12.2010 and also mentioned that the
assessee was asked to appear on or before 22.12.2010. However, in the
notice dt. 22.12.2010, the Valuation Officer asked the assessee of appear
or or before 29.12.2010 and the assessment order is dt. 28.12.2010. Thus,
it can be seen that there is definitely violation of principles of natural
justice. We, therefore, restore the issue to the file of the AO. The AO is
directed to direct the Valuation Officer to give a fair and reasonable
opportunity to the assessee to present his case and decide the issue afresh
after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
8. Since we have restored the issue to the file of the AO, we do not
find it necessary to decide the other issues raised vide ground No. 2 & 3.
9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed
for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 22nd
(JOGINDER SINGH ) (N.K. BILLAIYA)
Û /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai; Dated : 22nd January, 2015
.../ RJ , Sr. PS
4 ITA No. 514/M/2012
/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. / The Appellant
2. × / The Respondent.
3. () / The CIT(A)-
4. / CIT
5. , ,
/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. [ / Guard file.
/ BY ORDER,
× //True Copy//
, / ITAT, Mumbai