PRODYUT KUMAR DUTTA Vs. COMPETENT AUTHORITY INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ACQUISITION RANGE I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 269J of the I.T. Act, 1961, against the order of the I.T- Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, in respect of an acquisition order under Section 269F(6) of the I.T. Act,-1961, by the Competent Authority, namely, the IAC, Acquisition, Range-I, regarding premises No. 105/7B, Surendra Nath Banerjee Road, Calcutta. There is a house property at No. 105/7B, Surendra Nath Banerjee Road, Calcutta, consisting of one-storeyed brick-building housing a few shops mainly with land on part whereof the same is built covering an area of 4.7 kottahs, belonging to one Sri Amar Nath Seal of 308, Chittaranjan Avenue, which was sold to three different persons under three different conveyances registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta. The names of the purchasers are (1) Sri Provat Kumar Dutta, (2) Sri Prasanta Kumar Dutta, and (3) Sri Prodyut Kumar Dutta. Each of them was the purchaser of an 1/3rd undivided share for a consideration of Rs. 34,000. The transaction under consideration, according to the revenue in the present case, is of the 1/3rd share in the said property purchased by each of the three persons. On receipt of information from the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta, the above transaction, according to the revenue, was sent up for valuation to the Valuation Officer, Unit-II. The Valuation Officer valued the entire property at Rs. 1,29,501 and the individual 1/3rd share in the present transaction at Rs. 43,167 against the admitted consideration of Rs. 34,000.

(2.) It would be relevant at this stage to refer to the valuation made by the Valuation Officer. The Valuation Officer of the department has stated that the property was inspected by him on November 13, 1973, and the property comprised of a single storeyed shop housed in a very old structure previously used as stables. The building is nearly 100 years old. Shopkeepers have maintained and renovated the building from time to time. The building has no electrical and sanitary arrangements, except one common latrine at the back. The Valuation Officer goes on to say that the total area of the plot as per Corporation plan is 4.7 kottahs. The Valuation Officer further notes that the sellers initiated a case in the High Court for the eviction of the tenants. The High Court's decision was that the eviction was not possible, but while building a new structure by dismantling the old one, the same shopkeepers have to be given their corresponding accommodation at a slightly higher rate of rent and no other compensation for the period of construction during which the shopkeepers would have to suspend their business, which was estimated to be only 9 months. The present owners produced a sanctioned plan for the development of the area before the Valuation Officer. The plan contemplated a four-storeyed construction on a slightly larger plinth area by increasing the width of the building from 15'-9 " to 21'-3 " by excluding cantilever verandahs. As recent land price in the area, the Valuation Officer went on to observe, could not be ascertained for want of sale instances, the land price had been computed on the basis of development method, according to him, based on the sanctioned plan and the market rental except for the ground floor where the rental increase would be only Rs. 10 per shop from Rs. 40 to Rs. 50 per month. According to the Valuation Officer of the department there are only 7 shops and in the new construction there will also be seven shops. None of the tenants pay any taxes. The sale price of the land was thus worked out by him at Rs. 27,000 per kottah which was considered by him to be fair and reasonable for this area. As the building was more than 100 years old, while calculating the valuation by land and building method, only the salvage value had been considered, that is to say, salvage value plus price of the land, had been considered by him. The Valuation Officer went on to observe that the land was in a developed area and was revenue free land. The locality was very close to Ran Kidwai Road on S. N. Banerjee Road, close to Lotus Cinema in Calcutta. According to the Valuation Officer, commercially the area was not as important as Dharamtalla Street. The plot was having a road frontage facing south of nearly 94 ft. The depth of the plot was only 34 ft. as per measurement but it was shown as 36 ft. in the Corporation plan. There was a compound wall at the back. The existing building had a very low plinth height and only about 8 ft. storey height, single storeyed. There was no stair to the roof. The walls were 18" thick in line, soorki and mortar lime plastered. The roof was laid on old rails as beams, burnt earthen tiles and terraced over. The flooring was lime concrete with cement plaster. There was no window. The front opening was initially provided with M. S. rods as gratings which were placed in many of the shops by collapsible gates. By the land and building method the valuation of the property, according to the departmental valuer, came to Rs. 1,29,500. He enclosed a calculation sheet which is as follows : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_42_ITR134_1982Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) Acting on this valuation report, notice was given by the IAC, which was as follows: .