TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld of valuation and though it may not be necessary for him to give detailed account of the reasons for coming to the conclusion that it is a fit case for reference to the Valuation Officer but he ought to have appreciated that in the case of a jointly held asset singling out one co-owner without even bothering as to what has happened in other co-owners' cases would definitely lead to arbitrariness - rule of consistency ought to have been followed by the AO - no action has been taken in the hands of the other co-owners, it is not a fit case for reference to the Valuation Officer - Decided in favour of Assessee. - ITA No. 2830/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 20-6-2013 - Shri D. Manmohan And Shri D. Karunakara Rao,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tered Valuers report and hence the valuation report was rejected by the AO. However, since the assessment was getting time barred on 31.12.2009, the AO completed the assessment by observing that in the absence of fair market value as on 01.04.1981 the original purchase price of Rs. 49,980/- is taken as cost of acquisition for computation of indexed cost, which would be revised after receipt of valuation report from the DVO. He also observed that after the untimely demise of his father on 23.11.2003 the flat was devolved upon mother and other siblings including the assessee. In other words, only after 23.11.2003 the property was inherited by the assessee and his family members and hence the value as on 23.11.2003 has to be taken into conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... journed to 12.06.2103. The learned D.R. submitted that though he contacted the AO no information was forthcoming in this regard. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee filed a written submission wherein he categorically stated that in respect of all the other three co-owners the Income Tax Department has not made any efforts to make such addition. In this regard it was submitted that the assessee is permanently settled in London. Shri Sachin Pradhan is suffering from chronic severe mental disease and he is unemployed for decades. He has not filed any income tax return. Assessee's mother, Smt. Sunetra, is 84 years old and is terminally ill. She has also not filed return. The other co-owner is assessee's brother Shri Ame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ference can be made to the Valuation Officer. However, it is not necessary for us to go into that issue in the instant case. Since the impugned property was sold jointly and the assessee being owner of the property any view taken by the AO/Revenue has to be consistent in all the cases. The learned counsel categorically stated that no action was taken in respect of the other co-owners. In the instant case, in order to maintain consistency, the AO ought not to have referred the matter to the Valuation Officer without verifying as to what was the stand taken by the Revenue in the case of other co-owners. In fact, the AO nowhere stated as to whether he has made any investigation with regard to the other co- owners' cases. Even the learned CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
