Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

409. The Agreem ent to Sell for unit No. 501 to 503 was executed on 25.01.2011. The schedule of paym ent was decided as under :

PAYMENT PLANT At the Tim e of Booking 25 % of Sale Pri ce 30.04.2 011 15 % of Sale Pri ce On 31.07.201 1 15 % of Sale Pri ce On 31.10.201 1 15 % of Sale Pri ce On 31.01.201 2 15 % of Sale Pri ce On Intim ation for Posses sion 15 % of Sale P rice + Stamp Duty & R egi strati on Charges 3.1 The Vendee has made a payment of Rs.2,60,00,000/- vide cheque No. 023655 on 25.01.2011. There was some dispute between the assessee and the vendee and ultimately Sale Deed was executed during the Accounting Year relevant to assessment year 2014-15. The ld. AO has confronted the assessee qua Section 43CA. The stand of the AO was that Section 43CA is equivalent to Section 50C of the Income Tax Act. Under Section 50C, full sale consider ation implied u/s ITA No.131, 132, 146,147/CHD/2020 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 48 of the Incom e Tax Act will be deemed equivalent to the amount on which Stamp Duty was charged by the Stamp Duty Authority for the purpose of registering the Sale Deed.

5. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee raised many fold of contentions. In his first fold of contention, it was submitted that assessee agreed to sell for office units on 25.01.2011 and 27.01.2011. At that point of time, Section 43CA was not in picture, hence, no addit ion ought to be made with the help of Section 43CA.

5.1 In next fold of contention, he submitted that as per sub-clause (3) and (4) of Section 43CA, the Stamp Duty Valuation as applicable on the date of agreement is required to be adopted by the AO instead of the duty available on the date of Sale Deed. In the year 2011, there was no collectorate rates available for collecting the Stamp Duty, hence, the deaming f iction provided u/s 43CA fails. For butressing his proposition, he drew our attention to the Valuation Report where ld. DVO him self did not adopt the collectorate rate and rather made an observation that adopting collectorate rate to work out Fair Market Value of the subjected property may not be appropriate in this case. In view of the evidence produced by the assessee, moreover, collectorate rates available are for commercial space and not specifically for office space.

As th e deviatio n between Fair Mar ket Value & Sales Consideration received, is l ess than 10% Marginal Relief provided u/s 50C.

6. The ld. CIT DR, on the other hand, r elie d upon orders of Revenue Authorities. He submitted that Section 43CA is applicable because Sale Deed has been registered during the Accounting Year relevant to Financial Year 2014-15. The only benefit available to the assessee is sub-clause (3) and (4) of Section 43CA. In other words, at the most, collectorate rate deter mining the Stamp Duty valuation on 25.01.2011 could be considered but it cannot be said that Section 43CA is not applicable.

7. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record car efully. Section 43CA has a direct bearing on the controversy in hand, therefore, we deem it appropriate to take note of this Section, which r ead as under :

Special pr ovision for full value of consideration for transfer of ass ets other than capital assets in certain cases.
43CA. (1)Where the consideration received or a ccru ing as a result of the t ransfer by an assessee of an asset (other than a capital asset), being land or buildi ng or both, is less than th e value a dopt ed o r ass essed or assessable by any authority of a State Gover nment fo r the purpose of payment of stamp dut y in respect of such transfer, the value so ad opted or ass essed or assessable shall, f or t he pur poses ITA No.131, 132, 146,147/CHD/2020 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 of co mputing pr ofits an d gains f ro m transf er of such a sset, be deemed to b e the full val ue of the consid eration received or accruing as a result of such transfer.