Case Law Details
Hari Mittar Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Introduction: In a recent ruling by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai in the case of Hari Mittar Yadav vs. ITO, the issue of long-term capital gains (LTCG) and the application of Section 50C came under scrutiny. The central question was whether the addition based on unregistered deeds entered on judicial stamp papers should be upheld or not. This article provides a detailed analysis of the case and its implications.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Background of the Case: The appellant, Hari Mittar Yadav, challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case pertained to the Assessment Year 2012-13. The appellant’s primary objection was related to the addition made under Section 50C of the Act. Notably, the appellant’s representation was absent during the proceedings, prompting the ITAT to adjudicate the case based on available records.
2. Addition Under Section 50C: The crux of the matter was the valuation of immovable property by the stamp duty authority. The property was sold for Rs. 12 lakhs, as evidenced by a registered deed of transfer dated 18.01.2012. However, for the purpose of stamp duty computation, the stamp duty authority valued the property at Rs. 1,00,89,500. This valuation was accepted by the sale parties, who also paid the relevant stamp duty based on this valuation. The ITAT had made inquiries into the variance between the stamp duty value and the sale consideration. The appellant claimed that the property had been transferred in 2006, but the sale deed was executed in 2012 due to a misunderstanding between the buyers and the sellers. The appellant provided documents, including partnership deeds, retirement and reconstitution of partnership, and an indemnity bond cum affidavit cum undertaking, to support this claim.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
