Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2002 (1) TMI 278

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the ground that the CWT(A) erred in setting aside the assessment by placing reliance on the order for asst. yr. 1987-88 wherein reference was made to the future decision of this year. For asst. yr. 1990-91, the Revenue agitated on the ground that the CWT(A) erred in directing the AO that whatever position remains in asst. yr. 1989-90 the same will be followed for this year also with regard to the valuation of three plots situated at Ramesh Nagar, Delhi. 2. For all three years, the assessee has given the following grounds of cross-objections : (1) The learned CWT(A) erred in not considering and appreciating the submissions made by the assessee and further erred in not deciding the appeal on merit. (2) The learned CIT(A) also erred in d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... also followed this valuation report. However, keeping in view the increase in prices he estimated the fair market value for asst. yr. 1987-88 at Rs. 17 lacs. For asst. yr. 1990-91 he has estimated the same value as per asst. yr. 1988-89 i.e., Rs. 18,99,420 as determined by the AVO. 6. While adopting the fair market value of these plots on different dates, the AO did not consider the objection of the assessee. The learned authorised representative submitted that the AVO in his report had not denied the fact of sale of plot No. 14 in the same block No. 10 of Ramesh Nagar which was within 200 yards from the assessee s plot and 7th plot after last plot No. 7 of the assessee. It is not denied that it was sold as plot and had the same advantag .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed on 12th Aug., 1985. Vide submissions dt. 6th July,1994, the assessee had prayed that the valuation of assessee s plots to be made on the basis of sale of the plot No. 14 giving credit and debit for the factors like plot being of irregular size whereas the sale instance of plot No. 14 being a corner plot and the sale being about 19 months prior to valuation date for the asst. yr. 1987-88. The working given in that submission appearing at p 8 of the paper book would show that on comparison with that sale, the value of the assessee s three plots would be about Rs. 5 lacs for asst. yr. 1987-88 and about Rs. 5.50 lacs for the later assessment years. 9. Though with letter dt. 24th May, 1989, the assessee had filed with the AVO, New Delhi, ph .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... horised representative submitted that it is suffice to say that the sale consideration shown in the registered sale deed is real unless otherwise proved. The apparent is real unless otherwise proved. The sale consideration was accepted by the Sub-Registrar for the purpose of registration and stamp duty and even the ITO assessing the seller S. Inder Singh accepted the sale consideration for the purpose of capital gain. The seller is assessed to income-tax in Ward-A, Sriganganagar, and the return of income for the relevant year had been accepted. At the end the learned authorised representative requested that the issue should be decided on merit and the following value on the basis of sale instance may be adopted: Comparable sale ins .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e case of CIT vs. Leatherite Industries Ltd. (1984) 40 CTR (P H) 79 : (1984) 147 ITR 655 (P H). Instance of plots in different areas cannot be compared when the sale instance comparable with the same area is filed by the transferee. It was also thus held that in the case of Mani Singh Avtar Singh vs. IAC (Acqn.) (1984) 41 CTR (P H) 243 : (1985) 151 ITR 233 (P H). In this case it was also held that price of a plot of land which has been built upon cannot compare favourable with that of an unbuilt area. Therefore, we hold that the AVO and the WTO/CWT(A) should have decided the case on the basis of sale instance of the plot of the same vicinity given by the assessee. The learned authorised representative while comparing the deduction of valuat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates