9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made on the basis of change of opinion on same set of facts, whereas the original assessment was made on the basis of value as on 01.04.1981 determined by assessee's valuer and reopening was made on the basis of value as on 01.04.1981 determined by the DVO and hence the reopening was not made on same set of facts. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) was correct in holding that the A.O. has no power to make reference to DVO u/s 55A of the Act, since the consideration on 01.04.1981 shown by assessee was more than value determined by DVO. 2. The only issue involved is the computation of capital gain on Long Term Capital Gain arising on sale of two properties viz. Crystal House and Dhanwatey House, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o-owner by the name of Kumari Radhika Amrut Dhanwatey wherein the CIT(A)-I, vide his order No. CIT(A)- 1/48/2014-15, dated 05-10-2015 has decided the matter in favour of the appellant on merit as well as on the legality of assuming of jurisdiction u/s 148. The only difference was that the said case had been processed u/s 143(1) and scrutiny assessment was not made. In the said order, with regard to assuming of jurisdiction u/s 148 the following findings have been given by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Nagpur, "...8.0 In ground No. 1 & 2, the appellant has challenged the validity of reopening of the assessment within the meaning of secion 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this regard the AR of the appellant has contended that the reopening of the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its and legality ... " 3.3 I am in agreement with the above findings of the Ld. cn (A)-l. As a matter of fact the case of the appellant under consideration is on a much stronger footing as the original assessment in this case was finalised u/s, 143(3) and the Ld. AO had carried out various enquiries with regard to the correctness of computation of Long Term Capital Gain during the course of original assessment proceedings and subsequently took a contrary view on the same set of facts which is therefore a clear case of change of opinion. In view of the above, it is hereby held that the re-opening of assessment was itself invalid and is required to be cancelled." 5. Against the above order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. We have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
