Case Law Details
Naina Saraf Vs PCIT (ITAT Jaipur)
Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) cannot be applied prior to a A.Y. 2014-15 as section comes into effect from A.Y. 2015-16
The Finance Act, 2013 inserted clause (ii) in S. 56(2)(vii)(b) reading as under:
‘(ii) for a consideration which is less than the stamp duty value of the property by an amount exceeding fifty thousand rupees, the stamp duty value of such property as exceeds such consideration ”
The pre amended law evidently did not cover a situation where an immovable property was received by an individual or HUF for a consideration, whether adequate or inadequate, whether consideration was less than the stamp duty valuation by an amount exceeding Rs. 50,000/-. In other words, the pre amended law which was applicable up to A.Y. 2013-14 never contemplated such a situation and it was only in the amended law, specifically made applicable for and from A.Y. 2014 15 that any receipt of the immoveable property with inadequate consideration has been subjected to the provisions of S. 56(2)(vii)(b) but not before that. Hence, the applicability of the said provision in such cases, could not be insisted in the assessment years prior to a A.Y. 2014-15. Having said this, in this case, there was a valid and lawful agreement entered by the parties long back in A.Y. 2010-11 only, when the subject property was transferred and substantial obligations were discharged. The law contained in S. 56(2)(vii)(b) as stood at that point of time, did not contemplate a situation of a receipt of property by the buyer with for inadequate construction. Hence, we are of the considered view that the ld. Pr.CIT erred in applying the said provision. Because of the mere fact that the flat was registered in the year 2014 falling in A.Y. 2015-16 on the fulfillment of the conditions, the amended provision of S. 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) could not be applied.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
