TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cal buyer in hypothetical market. The value assessed by registering authorities for stamp duty purpose cannot be the basis for estimating the fair market value. Therefore, any valuation report based on the value as per the register maintained by the Registering Authorities cannot be taken as the basis for the purpose of valuing fair market value. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that interest of justice would be met, if the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the registered valuer has adopted the land rate based on similar properties in the adjoining areas, a finding contrary to the facts on record in view of the categorical observations of the registered valuer in his report that there was no comparable sale instances in the locality. 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the OVO had estimated the FMV as on 01.04.1981 in an objective and scientific manner, adopting OOA land rates as available in Nabhi's guide to house Tax after duly considering the general as well as property specific locational features. 4.1 The Ld CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) vide order dated 30th March, 2013 at a total income of ₹ 7,18,82,000/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 2,97,98,800/- under the head long term capital gains. The factual matrix leading to this addition is as under: (a) During the previous year relevant to the assessment under consideration, the respondent assessee sold house property located at B-59, Mayfair Garden, Hauz Khas, which was jointly held by her brother Sh. Anil T. Kriplani (50% each) for a total consideration of ₹ 15.8 crores vide registered sale deed dated 5th May, 2009. The respondent assessee in the return of income, disclosed the capital gains arising out of sale of this property ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Delhi, the contentions raised by the appellant have force. It will not be proper to apply mechanically the land rates as prescribed by some private agency without considering peculiarities of the property in question. In present case, the property is located in Hauz Khas area of Delhi which is very well developed and high class posh area. It is a park facing free hold property. The registered valuer has mentioned that he has adopted land rate based on that for similar properties in the adjoining areas. Before DVO, the appellant has taken an objection that since the sale value as on 05.05.2009 has been accepted, land value as on 01.04.1981 can be worked out by backward indexation and it comes out to be ₹ 54,365 per sq meter (3,43,590 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be the basis for making addition and he further submitted that for the purpose of valuation of the property, the valuation as per the Nabhi s Guide to House Tax publication cannot be the basis. Hence, he submitted that the CIT(A) s order is as per the law and he relied upon the following decisions: i. Haiben Jayantilal Shah Vs. Income Tax Officer and Another, [2009] 310 ITR 31 (Guj.) ii. CIT Vs. Daulal Mohta (HUF), [2014] 360 ITR 680 (Bom.); iii. CIT Vs. Gauranginiben S. Shodhan, [2014] 367 ITR 238 (Guj.); iv. ACIT Vs. Sh. Raman K. Suri, ITA No. 4242/Mum./09, AY-2006-07, Dt. 30.04.2010 5. We heard the rival submission and perused the material on record. At the first instance, we shall deal with the validity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be the basis for estimating the fair market value. Therefore, any valuation report based on the value as per the register maintained by the Registering Authorities cannot be taken as the basis for the purpose of valuing fair market value. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that interest of justice would be met, if the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes. The decision is pronounced in the open court on 23rd September, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
