Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

April 2012

Assessment giving effect to Tribunal order: Scope: A.Y. 1994-95: Capital gains: Sale of property and factory building: Sale consideration accepted by AO: Tribunal referring back the question of bifurcation and apportionment of sale consideration between land and building: AO enhancing sale consideration: Not justified.

By K. B. Bhujle, Advocate
Reading Time 2 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
In the A.Y. 1994-95, the assessee sold a property consisting of land and factory building for a consideration of Rs.17.5 lakh. Permission for sale was granted by the Appropriate Authority u/s.269UL(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee challenged the apportionment of the sale consideration between the land and building by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal referred back the question of bifurcation and apportionment of sale consideration between land and building to the Assessing Officer. While re-examining, the Assessing Officer also enhanced the sale consideration. The Tribunal accepted the enhancement.

On appeal by the assessee, the Delhi High Court reversed the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“(i) The Tribunal had referred back the question of bifurcation and apportionment of the sale consideration of Rs.17.5 lakh as between the land and the factory building. To this extent, the report of the Valuation Officer was required.

(ii) The Departmental Valuation Officer and the Assessing Officer were not required or permitted by that order to go into to question and examine the total sale consideration as the assessee had applied under Chapter XX-C and the Appropriate Authority had accepted the sale consideration mentioned by the assessee. The sale consideration and the quantum thereof was never in question or doubt. This was not the aspect to be reexamined.

(iii) Thus the enhancement by the Assessing Officer of the sale consideration from 17.5 lakh to Rs.21,42,502 was not justified and as per law.

(iv) According to the report of the Depatmental Valuation Officer, the bifurcation and apportionment of the sale consideration towards the land and the factory building by the assessee had been accepted.

(v) In view of the above, the question of law is answered in favour of the assessee appellant.”

You May Also Like