TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or deduction u/sec. 54F. Since AO has not made any addition, the contention raised by the Department with regard to the SRO value as well as granting of exemption u/sec. 54F was incorrect, since, both of them were not born out of impugned assessment order. Therefore, we agree with the contention of the ld. AR that the appeal is below the prescribed limit of tax under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 , dated 11/07/2018, and not covered by exceptions, hence, not maintainable. Thus, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. - I.T.A. No. 687/VIZ/2019 and C.O. No. 11/VIZ/2020 - - - Dated:- 10-2-2021 - N. K. Choudhry, Member ( J ) And D. S. Sunder Singh , Member ( A ) For the Appellant : G. V. N. Hari , Advocate For the Respondents : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(A) examined both the issues and allowed relief to the assessee as under:- 8.3(a) Issue of Sale consideration: The appellant admitted the sale consideration at ₹ 60,00,000. The capital gains were originally assessed by adopting this amount as sale consideration. Later, the Revenue audit party noticed that the SRO value of the property was ₹ 63,17,000 and therefore the assessing officer submitted in the remand report that the SRO value of the consideration should be adopted in view of the provisions of S. 50C of the Act. The appellant contended that the assessing officer did not get the valuation done by the DVO for ascertaining the fair market value of the property. In this regard, the appellant could establish that the Im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion is allotted to her mother Mrs. Ena Mary Larive. From the above, it is very much evident that the appellant received only one flat jointly with her mother. The assessing officer is justified in granting exemption u/sec. 54F in the original assessment. 5. Against the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Department is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. DR argued that there was revenue audit objection which was accepted by the Department and both the objections were brought to the notice of the ld. CIT(A) by way of remand report. The ld. CIT(A) allowed the relief to the assessee, therefore argued that the case is covered by the exceptions, hence, argued that the appeal is maintainable and hence requested to set aside the order of the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
