Rajini Venugopal v. The Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax Range Ii, 347 A, Dr.nanjappa Road, Coimbatore 641 018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13.08.2008 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVIRAJA PANDIANandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE P.P.S.JANARTHANA RAJA W.P.Nos.37859 and 37860 of 2007 Rajini Venugopal..Petitioner in W.P.No.37859/07Kumudini Venugopal..Petitioner in W.P.No.37860/07versus 1. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range II, 347 A, Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore 641 018. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward II (3) Kings Complex, 347, Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore 641 018. ..Respondents PRAYER: Writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records ofthe first respondent in his file ABAPV2377G/R.II/2007-2008 andABEPV8712D/R.II/2007-2008 respectively and quash the impugned orderdated 17.12.2007. For Petitioners: Mr.J.BalachanderFor Respondents: Mr.Ravikumar, Standing Counsel for IT JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN,J.) The assessees filed the above writ petitions seeking for therelief of writ of certiorari to call for the records of the firstrespondentinhisfileABAPV2377G/R.II/2007-2008andABEPV8712D/R.II/2007-2008 respectively and quash the impugned orderdated 17.12.2007. 2. The above relief has been sought for on the followingfacts:- When the assessment proceedings for the Assessment year 2005-2006 are pending before the Income Tax Officer for completion, theAssessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment by computingthe capital gains arising on transfer of a land invoking theprovisions of Sec.50C. Objecting to the proposal, the assesseespreferred applications under Section 144A seeking intervention of theAdditional Commissioner in clarifying the interpretation of provisionof Sec.50C to the effect that only the actual sale proceeds receivedon transfer in the two instances of sale, the Long Term Capital Gainsas stated in the return of income has to be admitted. According tothe assessees, the actual consideration received was Rs.47 lakhs andRs.25 lakhs respectively. But the assessment was sought to befinalised on the basis of the value determined by the stamp valuationauthority. Whileso, the Assessing Officer referred the issue to theValuation Officer. Aggrieved by the action of the Assessing Officerreferring the matter to the Valuation Officer under Section 50(2)(b),the assessees approached the Addl. Commissioner u/s 144A. TheAdditional Commissioner of Income Tax by the impugned orders,directed the Assessing Officer to ignore the valuation report arrivedat by the Valuation Officer and proceed to finalise the assessment byadopting the value assessed or adopted by the Stamp ValuationAuthority as the full value of the consideration for sale. Thecorrectness of the same is now canvassed before this Court in thesewrit petitions. 3. Mr.J.Balachander, learned counsel appearing for thepetitioners submitted that the purchasers aggrieved by the orderspassed by the Stamp Valuation Authority, has taken the matter by wayof writ petitions before this Court and until final orders are passedin the writ petitions, the assessment should not be finalised bytaking the full value of the consideration as determined by the lowerauthorities under the Stamp Act. 4. We are not able to accept the contention of the learnedcounsel for the petitioners. If ultimately the Writ Court grants anyrelief in favour of the transferee of the property, that willautomatically apply to the assessees also, and the Capital Gain taxcould be adjusted as per the outcome of the writ petition and forthat purpose the assessment cannot be kept pending. 5. With the above observations, the writ petitions aredismissed. No costs. The assessees are permitted to impleadthemselves in the writ petitions filed by the purchasers pendingbefore this Court. 4. We are not able to accept the contention of the learnedcounsel for the petitioners. If ultimately the Writ Court grants anyrelief in favour of the transferee of the property, that willautomatically apply to the assessees also, and the Capital Gain taxcould be adjusted as per the outcome of the writ petition and forthat purpose the assessment cannot be kept pending. 5. With the above observations, the writ petitions aredismissed. No costs. The assessees are permitted to impleadthemselves in the writ petitions filed by the purchasers pendingbefore this Court. sd/-Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarrgTo1. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range II, 347 A, Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore 641 018.2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward II (3) Kings Complex, 347, Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore 641 018.+2ccs To Mr.J.Balachander, Advocate, SR.44919W.P.Nos.37859 and 37860 of 2007ssv [co]gkg/27.8