The Tribunal held that the proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act was mandatory and not directory and that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the said proviso as he had fulfilled the conditions laid down therein. The Tribunal observed that the assessee had entered into an agreement to sell the property on 21.06.2010 and had paid Rs. 1,00,00,000 by cheque on 23.06.2010 as a part of the consideration. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had submitted the valuation report of the property as on the date of the agreement, which showed that the fair market value of the property was Rs. 1,82,00,000, the same as the consideration paid by the assessee. The Tribunal further noted that the bank had verified the payment of Rs. 1,00,00,000 by cheque and had furnished the relevant details to the AO. The Tribunal, therefore, held that the AO and the DRP had erred in taking the stamp duty value of the property on the date of registration and in disregarding the proviso to section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. (AY.2014-15)
Shyamkumar Madhavdas Chugh v. ACIT [2024] 109 ITR 49 (SN)/ 205 ITD 227 (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 56: Income from other sources – Sale of property — Stamp value — Agreement fixing consideration in 2010,registration taking place in 2013 — Paid part consideration by cheque in 2010 before date of agreement — Stamp value on date of agreement In 2010 to be considered- Addition is deleted. [S. 56(2)(vii)(b)]