Anant Govind Patil Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Summary: The Mumbai ITAT dismissed the assessee’s appeal concerning long-term capital gains on the transfer of immovable property for AY 2015-16. Reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 148A, and the transaction was independently verified under section 133(6). The registered conveyance dated 31.12.2014 recorded consideration of Rs.67 lakh, while the Stamp Valuation Authority valued the property at Rs.1.58 crore. As 14 co-sellers executed the deed and no evidence established a different ownership ratio, the AO treated the assessee’s share as 1/14th and, applying section 50C, computed long-term capital gain at Rs.11.23 lakh. The Tribunal rejected the claim that the assessee was merely a facilitator who had received only Rs.70,000, noting the absence of any registered document evidencing an earlier transfer or unequal share. It also rejected reliance on section 50CA, as that provision applies to unquoted shares. The claim for fair market value as on 01.04.2001 under section 55(2)(b)(ii) failed for want of reliable supporting evidence. Since the computed income exceeded the applicable threshold, the Tribunal also rejected the plea that no return was required under section 139(1) and upheld the CIT(A)’s order.
Introduction
Recently fought case of an Assessee who was holding PoA for executing the documents for transfer of plot land on behalf of 13 other co-owners, however in the absence of following documents the case was decided against the Assessee:
1. Original Transfer Agreement;
2. Document defining share of each co-owner in the land;
3. Confirmation from other co-owners for receipt of the consideration as well as their share in the land;
4. Document for proving property devolvement of property upon the Assessee or Family Tree;
5. Valuation Report for adopting value as on 01-Apr-2001 or municipal valuation document in support of Fair Market Value as on 01-Apr-2001;
6. No formal request was submitted by the Assessee to AO for referring the matter to Valuation Officer for determining FMV as on 01-Apr-2001.
Facts of the Case:
