ACIT, Agra v. Shri Raj Narain Singh Sarin and Sons SUF, Agra

ITA 454/AGR/2008 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 45420314 RSA 2008
Assessee PAN AAEHR3737H
Bench Agra
Appeal Number ITA 454/AGR/2008
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Agra
Respondent Shri Raj Narain Singh Sarin and Sons SUF, Agra
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 27-08-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 28-05-2010
Next Hearing Date 28-05-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 20-06-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH AGRA BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI P.K. BANSAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.454/AGR/2008 ASST. YEAR: 2004-05 ASSTT. C.I.T. - 2 AGRA. VS. SHRI RAJ NARAYAN S INGH SARIN & SONS HUF 4/117 CIVIL LINES AGRA. (PAN : AAEHR 3737 H). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. SEEMA RAJ CIT D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAKESH GUPTA C.A. ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL A.M.: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FIELD BY THE REVENUE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 25.03.2008 BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND S OF APPEAL :- (1). THAT THE CIT (APPEALS)-I AGRA HAS ERRED IN L AW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 05 39 785/- MADE U/S 50C OF I.T. ACT 1961 WIT HOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. (2). THAT THE CIT (APPEALS)-I AGRA HAS ERRED IN LA W AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED/ACCRUING AS PER TRA NSFER DEED IS THE ONLY VALUE WHICH CAN BE TAKEN TO BE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATIO N RECEIVED OR ACCRUING IN TERMS OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF IT ACT 1 961 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY ( CCRA) HAS DIFFERENTIATED TRANSFER OF DAWAMI LEASE RIGHTS AND OWNERSHIP RIGHT S FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSESSMENT OF VALUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY WHICH IS AGAINST THE DEFINITION GIVEN U/S 2(47) OF IT ACT 1961 UNDER WHICH LEASE R IGHTS OF MORE THAN 12 YEARS CONFER OWNERSHIP RIGHTS ON TRANSFEROR. (3). THAT THE CIT (APPEALS)-I AGRA HAS ERRED IN LA W AND ON FACTS BY HOLDING THAT TRANSFER OF DAWAMI LEASE RIGHTS IS NOT SUBJECT TO FAIR MARKET PRICE FOR THE 2 PURPOSE OF SECTION 50C OF IT ACT 1961 AGAINST THE DEFINITION U/S 2(47) OF IT ACT 1961 WHEREBY LEASE RIGHTS OF MORE THAN 12 YEARS CON FER OWNERSHIP RIGHTS ON TRANSFEROR. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS ASSIGNED LEASE HOLD RIGHTS IN A PROPERTY FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.1 CRORE. DURING THE YEAR THE A.O. ADOPTED A CONSIDERATION FOR THE SALE AT RS.2 12 08 000/- TAKING TO BE THE CIRCL E RATE AND ACCORDINGLY TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERSTATED THE CAPITAL GAIN BY RS.1 0 5 39 785/-.. 3. WHEN THE MATER WENT BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE CIT(A ) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSE D THE AFORESAID ORDERS OF THE CCRA AS QUOTED ABOVE. THERE REMAINS NO DOUB T THAT THE SAID AUTHORITY HAS HELD THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY THE AMOUNT OF CONSIDERATION SET FORTH IN THE INSTRUMENT OF TRANSFER IS TO BE CONSIDERED AND THAT THEREFORE DETERMINATION OF MARKET VALUE IS NOT CALLED FOR. IN SECTION 50C IT IS PROVIDED AS UNDER :- 1. WHERE THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER BY AN ASSESSEE OF A CAPITAL ASSET BEING LAND OR BUILD ING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT (HEREAFTER IN THIS SECTION REFERRED TO AS THE STAM P VALUATION AUTHORITY) FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL FOR THE PURPOSE S OF SECTION 48 BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RE CEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF SUCH TRANSFER. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTI ON (1) WHERE- A) THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS BEFORE ANY ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORIT Y UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) EXCEEDS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY A S ON THE DATE OF TRANSFER B) THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VA LUATION AUTHORITY UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED IN ANY APPEAL OR REVISION OR NO REFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE BEFORE ANY OTHER AUTHORI TY COURT OR THE HIGH COURT 3 THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY REFER THE VALUATION OF TH E CAPITAL ASSET TO A VALUATION OFFICER AND WHERE ANY SUCH REFERENCE IS MADE THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTIONS (2) (3) (4) (5) AND (6) OF SECTION 16A CLAUSE (1) OF SUB-SECTION (1) AND SUB-SECTIONS (6) AND (7) OF SECTION 23A SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECT ION 24 SECTION 34AA SECTION 35 AND SECTION 37 OF THE WEALTH-TAX ACT 1957 (27 OF 1 957) SHALL WITH NECESSARY MODIFICATIONS APPLY IN RELATION TO SUCH REFERENCE AS THEY APPLY IN RELATION TO A REFERENCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SUB-S ECTION (1) OF SECTION 16A OF THAT ACT. EXPLANATION: FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION VAL UATION OFFICER SHALL HAVE THE SAME MEANING AS IN CLAUSE (R) OF SECTION 2 OF THE W EALTH-TAX ACT 1957 (27 OF 1957). (3) SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SUB-SECT ION (2) WHERE THE VALUE ASCERTAINED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) EXCEEDS THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTIO N (1) THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY SUCH AUTHORITY SHALL BE TAKEN AS THE FU LL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER. 4. THE LD. D.R. BEFORE US RELIED ON THE ORDER OF TH E A.O. WHILE THE LD. A.R. VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE A.O. HAS WRONGLY TAKEN THE CONSI DERATION UNDER SECTION 50C AT RS.2 12 08 000/-. THE CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AU THORITY (CCRA) HAS DETERMINED THE VALUATION UNDER THE STAMP ACT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ST AMP DUTY AT RS.1 00 00 000/- AS PER ARTICLE 63 OF SCHEDULE 1B. SECTION 50C OF THE ACT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE VALUE SHOWN IN THE INSTRUMENT AS APPROVED BY CCRA WAS TO BE TAKEN AS DEEMED TRANS FER CONSIDERATION. THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN THE CATEGORICAL FINDING THAT THE CONSIDERATION AS P ER TRANSFER DEED IS FINALLY ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY IS THE CORRECT VALUE FOR THE PU RPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY. THEREFORE THE SAID VALUE WILL BE TAKEN TO BE THE CONSIDERATION UN DER SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. REFERRING TO SECTION 50C OF THE ACT IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT IF THERE IS A TRANSFER OF LAND OR BUILDING FOR A CONSIDERATION WHICH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL BE DEEMED AS CONSIDERATION RECEIVED. THUS ONCE THERE IS TRANSFER OF CAPITAL ASSET BY THE ASSESSEE IT WAS I NCUMBENT TO FOLLOW VALUE ADOPTED/ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY AS APPROVED BY THE CCRA F OR SUCH TRANSFER. IT WAS NOT OPEN TO THE 4 A.O. TO SAY THAT VALUE ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VALUATI ON AUTHORITY WAS SOMETHING ELSE. OTHERWISE ALSO IT WAS CONTENDED THAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSE SSEE THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE BALANCE LEASE HOLD RIGHT BY THE ASSESSEE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSIGNEE. I T IS NOT A CASE OF TRANSFER OF LAND SO THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C CAN BE APPLIED. RELIANCE WAS PLACED IN THIS REGARD ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD. VS. JT. CIT 80 ITD 251 ( DEL) PARA 46 128 TTJ 290 (MUM) 5. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE WORD ASSESSABLE USED IN SECTION 50C HAS GOT NO APPLICATION IN THIS CASE FOR MORE THAN ONE REASON. FIRST THIS WORD HAS BEEN MADE APPLICABLE W.E.F. 01.10.2009. SECONDLY THE MEANING OF THIS W ORD AS GIVEN IN THE EXPLANATION-2 CLEARLY SAYS THAT THIS WOULD ACQUIRE ANY RELEVANCE IF THE VALUAT ION WOULD HAVE BEEN REFERRED WHEREAS IN THIS CASE THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY WAS APPROACHED F OR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY. THIRDLY THE WORD ASSESSABLE WAS ADDED FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOS E MENTIONED IN THE MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVISIONS OF FINANCE BILL 2009 WHICH IS NOT AP PLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. WE HAVE HEAD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD ALONG WITH ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THE LD. A.R. BEFORE US VEHEMENTLY A RGUED THAT SECTION 50C IS NOT APPLICABLE. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE CCRA HAS DETERMINED THE VALUE FOR STAMP DUTY AT RS.1 CRORE. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE CCRA WHICH IS AV AILABLE AT PAGE NOS.13 TO 20 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE FACTS AS SET OUT IN THE ORDER ARE THAT O NE RAJ NARAIN SINGH SARIN WAS HAVING PERPETUAL LEASE HOLD RIGHTS IN A PLOT OF LAND SITUATED AT MOU JA NAGLA PADI DISTRICT AGRA BY VIRTUE OF A REGISTERED DEED DATED 19.07.1937. AFTER HIS DEATH THE SAID LAND WAS INHERITED BY THE HUF CONSISTING OF HIS SONS AND GRAND SONS. THE KARTA O F HUF EXECUTED A REGISTERED DEED DATED 5 03.11.2003 OF A PART OF THE SAID PROPERTY IN FAVOUR OF VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA ON PAYMENT OF RS.15 00 000/- AS CONSIDERATION FOR THE SAME. THE SAID DOCUMENT WAS SUBJECT MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 33 READ WITH SECTION 47A & 47B OF THE STAMP ACT. BEFORE A.D.M. (FINANCE) VIDE ORDER DATED 15.06.2004 DETERMINED A DEFICIENCY OF RS.21 99 000/- IN STAMP DUTY AND LEVIED PENALTY OF RS.5 49 250/-. THE MAIN CONT ENTION TAKEN BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CCRA WAS THAT THE STAMP DUTY ON SUCH INSTRUMENT IS CHARGEABLE UNDER ARTICLE 63 OF SCHEDULE 1B OF THE ACT AND THE PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 47A & 47B WHICH REQUIRE THAT THE STAMP DUTY SHOULD BE PAID ON THE BASIS OF MARKET VALUE ARE NOT APPLICABLE. AFTER HEARING DETAILED ARGUMENTS AND PERUSING VARIOUS CASE LAWS C ITED FROM BOTH THE SIDES THE CCRA VIDE ORDER DATED 15.12.2004 HELD AS UNDER :- THE FATHER OF THE EXECUTANT WAS LESSEE ON THE BASI S OF LEASE DEED DATED 19.07.1937 HENCE THEY CAN NOT TRANSFER BETTER RIGHT S THAN WHAT THEY PASSES HENCE THE SALE DEED OF CONVEYANCE COULD NOT BE EXECUTED B Y THEM. THE SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY CCRA ALLAHABAD IN STAMPS APPEAL NO.14 0 TO 156 OF 2003-04 DECIDED ON 17.06.2004. ON THE BASIS OF DISCUSSIONS MADE ABOVE I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE INSTRUMENT IN QUESTION IS A DEED OF TRANSF ER OF LEASE RIGHTS CHARGEABLE WITH STAMP DUTY ACCORDING TO ART 63 I.E. ON THE A MOUNT OF CONSIDERATION SET FORTH IN THE INSTRUMENT. THE ADM (F&R) WITHOUT PERUSING THE DOCUMENT AS WHOLE HELD IT TO BE A SALE DEED BUT THIS VIEW IS NOT SUSTAINA BLE IN VIEW OR THE DISCUSSIONS MADE BY ME ON THE BASIS OF SETTLED LEGAL POSITION. HENCE THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE. SINCE I HAVE HELD THAT THE INSTRUMENT IS A TRANSFER OF LEASE RIGHTS AND STAMP DUTY IS PAYABLE ON THE AMOUNT CONSIDERATION S ET FORTH IN THE INSTRUMENT IN QUESTION ACCORDING TO ART.- 63 HENCE THE OTHER ARGU MENTS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT ON THE QUESTION OF DETERMINATION OF M ARKET VALUE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE DEALT WITH. MOREOVER THE DOCUMENT WHICH IS COV ERED BY ARTICLE 63 CANNOT BE TERMED AS CONVEYANCE IN VIEW OF THE DEFINITION OF C ONVEYANCE IN SECTION 2(10) OF THE ACT. THUS ACCORDINGLY IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY ADM (F&R) DATED 15.06.2004 IN THIS CASE IS SET ASIDE. 6 7. FROM THE SAID ORDER WE NOTED THAT THIS ORDER NOW HERE DETERMINED THE VALUE UNDER THE STAMP ACT. IT ONLY LAYS DOWN THAT SINCE THE ASSESS EE HAS ASSIGNED THE LEASE HOLD RIGHT FOR THE BALANCE PERIOD THEREFORE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 47 A & 47B OF THE STAMP ACT ARE NOT APPLICABLE AND THE STAMP DUTY IS PAYABLE ON THE AMOUNT OF CONS IDERATION AS SET OUT IN THE INSTRUMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 63 OF SCHEDULE-1B OF THE S TAMP ACT. THUS WE REJECT THE PLEA TAKEN BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THE CCRA HAS DETERMINED THE VALUE FOR STAMP DUTY AT RS.1 CRORE FOR THE PROPERTY TRANSFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE. 8. AT THIS JUNCTURE IT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO CONSID ER THE RELEVANT PROVISION WHICH RUNS AS UNDER :- 50C. SPECIAL PROVISION FOR FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERA TION IN CERTAIN CASES.-(1) WHERE THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A R ESULT OF THE TRANSFER BY AN ASSESSEE OF A CAPITAL ASSET BEING LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOV ERNMENT (HEREAFTER IN THIS SECTION REFERRED TO AS THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORI TY) FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER THE VALU E SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 48 BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF SUCH TRANSFER. 9. IT IS OBSERVED THAT SECTION 50C WAS INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2002 WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2003. CLAUSE 24 OF THE FINANCE BILL AS PER N OTES ON CLAUSES STATES THAT THE INSERTION OF THIS PROVISION IS TO PROVIDE FOR A SPECIAL PROVISION FOR THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION IN CERTAIN CASES. IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE CONSIDERATION R ECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER BY AN ASSESSEE OF A CAPITAL ASSET BEING LAND OR BU ILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT (HE REAFTER IN THIS SECTION REFERRED TO AS THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY) FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAY MENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER 7 THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL FOR THE PUR POSES OF SECTION 48 BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF SUCH TRANSFER. 10. MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING PROVISIONS OF FINANCE BIL L 2002 STATES IN THIS REGARD AS UNDER :- THE BILL PROPOSES TO INSERT A NEW SECTION 50C IN T HE INCOME-TAX ACT TO MAKE A SPECIAL PROVISION FOR DETERMINING THE FULL V ALUE OF CONSIDERATION IN CASES OF TRANSFER OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. IT IS PROPOSED TO PROVIDE THAT WHERE THE CONSIDERAT ION DECLARED TO BE RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION AND CAPITAL GAINS SHALL BE COMPUTED ACCORDINGLY UNDER SECTION 4 8 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IT IS FURTHER PROPOSED TO PROVIDE THAT WHERE THE AS SESSEE CLAIMS THAT THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES E XCEEDS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS ON THE DATE OF TRANSFER AND HE H AS NOT DISPUTED THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED IN ANY APPEAL OR REVISION OR RE FERENCE BEFORE ANY AUTHORITY OR COURT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY REFER THE VALUAT ION OF THE RELEVANT ASSET TO A VALUATION OFFICER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 55A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE DETERMINED BY THE VALUATION OFFIC ER IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES THE ASSESSING OFFI CER MAY TAKE SUCH FAIR MARKET VALUE TO BE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION. HOWEVER IF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE DETERMINED BY THE VALUATION OFFICER IS MORE THAN TH E VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL NO T ADOPT SUCH FAIR MARKET VALUE AND WILL TAKE THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION TO BE THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES. IT IS ALSO PROPOSED TO PROVIDE THAT IF THE VALUE AD OPTED OR ASSESSED FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES IS REVISED IN ANY APPEAL REVIS ION OR REFERENCE THE ASSESSMENT MADE SHALL BE AMENDED TO RECOMPUTE THE C APITAL GAINS BY TAKING THE REVISED VALUE AS THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION. THESE AMENDMENTS WILL TAKE EFFECT FORM 01.04.2003 AND WILL ACCORDINGLY APPLY IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AN D SUBSEQUENT YEARS. 11. FROM THE PERUSAL OF NOTES ON CLAUSES AND MEMORA NDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVISIONS IN THE FINANCE BILL 2002 IT BECOMES EXPLICITLY CLEAR THA T IF THE CONSIDERATION DECLARED TO BE RECEIVED ON 8 SALE OF LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE V ALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION AND CAPITAL GAIN SHALL BE COMPUTED ACCORDINGLY UNDER SECTION 48 OF THE ACT. A DEEMING PROVISION HAS BEEN ENSHRINED FOR ASSUMING THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHO RITY OF STATE GOVERNMENT AS THE FULL VALUE OF SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRAN SFER. A LEGAL FICTION HAS BEEN CREATED ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE CASES WHERE THE CONSIDERATION RECEIV ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORIT Y OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER . IT IS A TRITE LAW THAT THE LEGAL FICTION CANNOT BE EXTENDED BEYOND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS ENAC TED. SECTION 50C EMBODIED THE LEGAL FICTION BY WHICH THE VALUE ASSESSED BY THE STAMP DUTY AUTHO RITIES IS CONSIDERED AS THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION FOR THE PROPERTY TRANSFERRED. IT DOE S NOT GO BEYOND THE CASES IN WHICH THE SUBJECT TRANSFERRED PROPERTY HAS NOT BECOME THE SUBJECT-MAT TER OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C. BY NO STRETCH OF IMAGINATION THE LEGAL FICTION CONFINED TO RESTRICTED OPERATION CAN BE WIDENED TO INCLUDE WITHIN ITS SWEEP ALL THE CASES WHERE SUCH PROPERTY IS NOT COVERED. 12. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C THUS ARE VERY CLE AR AND THIS PROVISION CAN BE APPLIED ONLY WHEN THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RE SULT OF THE TRANSFER BY AN ASSESSEE OF A CAPITAL ASSET BEING LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT (HEREAFTER IN THIS SECTION RE FERRED TO AS THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY) FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED SHALL FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 48 BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF SUCH TRANSFER. THE CCRA VIDE HIS ORDER AS POINTED OUT BY US EARLIER HAS ALREADY HELD THAT THE STAMP AUTHORITY IS NOT CAPABLE TO IMPOSE THE STAMP DUTY ON THE 9 MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE STAMP DUTY HAS TO BE PAID ONLY ON THE AGREED CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 63 OF SCHEDULE-1B OF THE STAMP ACT. THUS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A) AND THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION. 13. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAN DS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.08.201 0). SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (P.K. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 27 TH AUGUST 2010. PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR ITAT AGRA BENCH AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA TRUE COPY