For the purposes of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the stamp duty valuation to be adopted is the value prevailing on the date of the agreement to sell, provided the consideration is received through banking channels on or before that date, rather than the date of registration of the sale deed.

आदेश / ORDER

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 04.12.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2008-09. The following grounds are reproduced below:

“Ground No. 1 (a) Section 147 r.w.s 143(3): On the facts and in law, Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in issuing notice under section 148 dated: 27.03.2014 and passing assessment order dated: 27.03.2015 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the same is wholly without jurisdiction and void ab-initio, bad in law, passed against the principles of natural justice and thus liable to be quashed.

Ground No. 2 (a) Section 50C : On the facts and in law, Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.68,07,597 u/s 50C of the Income Tax Act, on the sale of agricultural lands by virtue of separate sale deeds on the basis of ready reckoner value on which the Purchasers were required to make the payment of Stamp duty

Ground No. 2 (b) Section 50C : On the facts and in law, Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer when Ld. Assessing Officer has not appreciated the fact that the deeming provision has been enshrined in Section 50C by virtue of which a legal fiction has been created for assuming the value adopted or assessed by any authority of State Government as the full value of sale consideration received in respect of such transfer and is not substitute for assessing income under capital gains in absence of adverse finding that appellant has received sum over and above actual consideration shown in return of income.

Ground No. 2 (c): On the facts and in law, Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer when Ld. Assessing Officer has not appreciated the fact that the appellant has sold and executed the sale agreement on dated 31.12.2007 of all 3 group of lands and even full payment was received on or before the agreement executed and possession handed over well before the agreement registered by buyer. The addition on account of short-term capital gains computed under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is wholly unjustified, without proper appreciation of facts and evidence on record

Ground No. 3: On the facts and in law, Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in initiating penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Axt 1961”

2. Ground Nos. 2(a) to 2(c) – First of all we take up ground nos. 2(a) to 2(c) as they are interrelated and interconnected and relates to challenging the order of Ld. CIT (A) in upholding additions made by AO under Section 50C of the IT Act, Therefore, we have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order.

Ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee relied upon written submissions. And submitted that CIT(A) erred in upholding additions made by AO under Section 50C of the Act as the assessee himself had rightly offered the short-terms capital gain on the sale of capital asset.

Whereas on the contrary Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities.

3. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have carefully perused the material placed on record, the judicial precedents cited before us, and the orders passed by the Revenue authorities.

4. From the records we noticed that, as per the facts of the pr