C.L. Sethi, Judicial Member - In these two appeals, filed by two different assessees, against two separate orders, both dated November 20, 2009 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Dehradun for the assessment year 2006-07, a common and identical issue is involved regarding the computation of long-term capital gain by applying the provisions of section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). In both appeals grounds raised by the assessee are identically worded as under :

"1.The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer assessing the long-term capital gain at Rs. 27,69,840 as per the provision of section 50C.

2.The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering the fact that stamp valuation adopted is for the circle rate of Chakrata, Dehradun whereas the property in question is situated at Tilak Road, Dehradun, which is a different area and is having lesser stamp valuation.

3.The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has not considered the fact that most of the properties under consideration are old tenanted properties on which the rent was very less and are sold to the tenants only.

4.The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has not considered that on some of the shops the appellant received salami/ premium about 10-15 years back and sale deed is the continuation of earlier salami agreement.

5.The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer that the provisions of section 50C(2) are not applicable."

2. These two appellants along with other two persons are the co-owners of property No. 1, Tilak Road, Dehradun having one-fourth share each in the said property. The co-owners have sold the said property during the year under consideration. In the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has shown long-term capital gain on sale of shops by showing the sale consideration at Rs. 72,42,500. It was further noticed by the Assessing Officer that the value of the property fixed by the stamp valuation authority was taken at Rs. 1,69,99,000. Similarly, in respect of some other property, the assessee had shown sale consideration at Rs. 2,50,000 as against value fixed by the stamp valuation authority at Rs. 13,80,000. After applying the provisions of section 50C of the Act, the Assessing Officer adopted the sale consideration equal to the value adopted by the stamp valuation authority and then determined the long-term capital gain from the sale of the property in question. On an appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) confirmed the Assessing Officer’s action by observing that the Assessing Officer has given a clear cut finding that for the purpose of arriving at the sale consideration, the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 50C are to be adopted, and since there was no reason to exercise discretionary power under section 50C(2) of the Act to make reference of the valuation of the capital asset to the Valuation Officer because the assessee never contested such valuation made by the stamp valuation authority. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), therefore, held that the Assessing Officer was very much justified in invoking the provisions of section 50C(1) of the Act in determining the long-term capital gain only.

3. Still aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

4. We have heard both parties and have carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. The first and foremost point that arises for our consideration is as to whether the Assessing Officer should have referred to the matter to the Valuation Officer under section 50C(2) of the Act to determine the fair market value before applying the provisions of section 50C(1) of the Act. In this connection, we have carefully perused the Assessing Officer’s order and find that in paragraph 3.4 of his order the Assessing Officer has