Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Jayashree Kothari Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 267/HYD/2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 26/10/2018
Related Assessment Year : 2012-13
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Jayashree Kothari Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)

Sec. 50C(2) enables the Assessing Officer to make a reference to the Valuation Officer. Whenever a reference is made by the AO to the Valuation Officer, such reference has to be construed as a reference made under sec. 16A(1) of the Wealth-tax Act. We have also carefully gone through the provisions of sec. 16A(1) of the wealth-tax Act, which provides the circumstances under which a property has to be referred to the Valuation Officer. Sub-sec. (2) and other provisions of sec. 16A provide the manner in which the property has to be valued. When a reference to the Valuation Officer is to be construed as a reference under sec. 16A(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, the manner laid down under the Wealth-tax Act for the purpose of valuing immovable property has to be adopted. Even though the legislature has not specifically referred to the valuation provided in Schedule III of the Wealth-tax Act, there is ample indication in sec. 50C(2) of the Income-tax Act that the property has to be valued under the Wealth-tax Act since the reference was to be construed as a reference under sec. 16A(1) of the Wealth-tax Act. If the intention of the legislature was not to apply the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act for the purpose of valuation, then, in our opinion, there was no need for any reference about the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act in sub-sec. (2) of sec. 50C of the Income-tax Act. Therefore, in our opinion, the manner laid down under the Wealth-tax Act has to be followed for the purpose of ascertaining the notional value of the property for the purpose of computing capital gain as provided under sec. 50C of the Income-tax Act.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Hyderabad, dated 23-11-2016, for the AY. 2012-13.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, deriving share income from the partnership firm Bhagwan & Co. She did not derive taxable income for any of the assessment years. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the assessee alongwith another sold immovable property vide Sale Deed No.454/2012 and derived sale consideration of Rs.16 Lakhs to her share.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031