9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 784X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ITAT was justified in confirming the findings of CIT(A) in adopting the rate of land at Rs. 70/- per sq. yd. being the basic allotment rate by the Housing Board as against the rate of Rs. 1260/- per sq. yd. as adopted by Registered Valuer which is the Market Value on the date of Valuation as per the normal practice and the provisions of law so that so the findings of the ITAT are perverse and thus bad in law? II. Whether the ITAT was justified in confirming the findings of CIT(A) in ignoring the valuation of working shed at Rs. 5,54,400/- as per Government Registered Valuers report being in conformation to the existence of the same as authenticated by him on personal visit/inspection of the impugned property and as supporte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Baldev Krishan, the previous owner. Accordingly, the cost of acquisition was taken at Rs. 14,19,965/-by the Assessing Officer after applying the cost inflation index and the capital gain from the sale of plot was computed at Rs. 1,05,80,035/-. On appeal, the CIT(A) applied the rate of land at Rs. 70/- per square yard as on 1.4.1981 and enhanced the income from capital gain to Rs. 1,10,18,953/-. The plea of the assessee was that the cost of acquisition should be calculated at the rate of Rs. 1260/- per square yard as against Rs. 70/- per square yard applied by the Assessing Officer. The assessee relied upon the valuation report from a registered valuer and submitted that the allotment rate does not reflect the fair market value. On furthe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 60/- per sq yds adopted by the Registered Valuer. Therefore, on this aspect, in our considered opinion, the CIT (Appeals) made no mistake in applying the rate of Rs. 70/- per sq yds to value the land as on 01.04.1981 in order to compute the cost of acquisition for the purpose of Capital Gain. ....Though we agree with the Revenue that there is no direct evidence available but considering the circumstantial evidence and the certificate of the Inspection by the Registered Valuer and in the absence and the certificate of Inspection by the Registered Valuer and in the absence of any clinching adverse evidence on record, in our view, the CIT(A), was not justified in ignoring the value of the working shed in its entirety for the purpose of comput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t whatever material is produced by the assessee regarding valuation must be accepted. The authorities below have relied upon the rate of allotment by the Housing Board as against the rate adopted by the registered valuer which is alleged to be the market value as on 1.4.1981. The difference being extra-ordinary and there being no acceptable material to support the report, the rate of allotment of the Housing Board was accepted on the basis of allotment which could not be held to be irrelevant. No specific instances were produced by the assessee. In any case the finding of the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal, against the assessee cannot be held to be a perverse finding. No substantial question of law arises in the appeal. 6. Accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
