I.T.A. NO.2108/LB AND 2900/113 OF 1998, DECIDED ON 1ST JUNE, 1999. VS I.T.A. NO.2108/LB AND 2900/113 OF 1998, DECIDED ON 1ST JUNE, 1999.
1999 P T D (Trib.) 3234
[Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan]
Before Mahmood Ahmad Malik, Accountant Member and Muhammad Tauqir Afzal Malik, Judicial Member
I.T.A. No.2108/LB and 2900/113 of 1998, decided on 01/06/1999.
Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---
----S.13(1)(d)---Income Tax Rules, 1982, R.207-A---Addition---Valuation-- Assessee declared value of shop higher than the rate fixed by the Collector of the District---Addition was made by the Assessing Officer adopting the value of the shop for the purpose of addition under S.13(1)(d) of the Income .Tax Ordinance, 1979 higher than the value adopted for the wealth tax assessment according to Collector's rate---Validity---Department had itself adopted the value of shop according to Collector's rate for wealth tax assessment and, thus, there was no question to adopt ,a different value for income-tax assessment---Department having accepted the principle that the valuation of immovable property should be adopted as per Collector's Table by introducing 8.207-A in the Income Tax Rules, 1982, Tribunal directed that the declared value should be accepted in circumstances.
I.T.As. Nos. 1138/KB of 1997-98 and 1053/KB of 1996-97 ref.
Javed Iqbal Qazi, I.T.P: for Appellant (in I.T.A. No.2108/LB of 1998)
Mrs. Riffat Shaheen Qazi, D.R. for .Respondent (in I.T.A. No.2108/LB of 1998).
Mrs. Riffat Shaheen Qazi, D.R. for Appellant (in I.T.A. No.2900/LB of 1998).
Javed Iqbal Qazi, I.T.P. for Respondent (in I.T.A. No.2900/LB of 1998)
Date of hearing: 27th May, 1999.
ORDER
These are cross appeals for the assessment year 1993-94. The appellant has agitated that the learned CIT(A) was not justified to fix the valuation of shop at Rs.1,300,000 as against Rs.1,573, 000 adopted by the Assessing Officer. The department, on the other hand, has stated that the reduction allowed by the learned CIT(A) is without any solid reason.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the original assessment in this casewas completed under Self-Assessment Scheme at net income of Rs.83,500. The case was reopened on the ground that .the appellant had purchased a commercial shop during the period relevant to the assessment year 1993-94. The appellant was confronted through show-cause notice against which reply was duly filed by the assessee. The appellant has shown the purchase price, of the shop at Rs.500,000. The learned A.R. stated before the Assessing Officer that the above shop was purchased having area 1 Marla -17 sq. ft. only. The learned A.R. further submitted that the aforesaid shop was purchased in dilapidated condition and the description of the shop was 7 feet front and 5 ft. 4 inch on the back with full ownership rights from bottom .to sky. After considering the reply the Assessing Officer issued fresh show-cause notice wherein the appellant was confronted with the valuation of the shop at Rs.2,057,000 @ of Rs.8,500 sq. ft. In reply the assessee's A.R. stated that the shop in the parallel case was a corner shop and was newly constructed and had been purchased after two and a half year. The Assessing Officer after giving due consideration to this fact adopted the price of the shop at Rs.1,573,000 @ of Rs.6,500 per sq. ft., and therefore, an addition of As.1,018,000 was made under section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Ordinance. The appellant being aggrieved preferred appeal before the CIT(A.) who reduced the addition to Rs.1,300,000.
3. Parties have been heard. The learned A.R. for the assessee has submitted a report of the, Valuer M/s. Anwar Gohar & Associates, dated 31-3-1997 wherein the valuation of the shop was estimated at Rs.497,414. The learned A.R. for the assessee has also produced a copy of wealth tax assessment order for the year 1993-94 wherein the value of the appellant's, shop was determined at Rs.457,583. Learned A.R. submitted that the valuation was assessed according to the D.C rates. Learned A.R. has also submitted two copies of this Tribunal's orders in I.T.A. No.1138/KB of 1997-98 (assessment year 1992-93), dated 2-3-1998, 1.T.A. No.1053/KB of 1996-97 (assessment year 1990--91) wherein it was held that the price should be adopted on the basis of Collector's rates. Learned D.R. on the other hand, has supported the order of the Assessing Officer for the reasons stated therein.
4. We have considered the submissions made by both the parties. The department has itself adopted the value of the shop in question in the year under appeal at Rs.457,583 according to D.C. rates for wealth tax assessment and, thus, there was no question to adopt a different value for income-tax assessment. It was also stated in one of the above cited judgments that the department has itself, by introduction of 207-A in the Income Tax Rules, accepted in principle that the valuation of immovable property should be adopted as per collectors tables. In the case before us the value of shop declared by the appellant is more than the value adopted for Wealth tax purposes and the\rates fixed by the District Collector. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the unreported judgments of the Tribunal given above we direct that the declared value of the shop disclosed by the appellant at Rs.500,000 should be accepted.
5. The appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
C.M.A./70/Tax(Trib) Appeal allowed