9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... areas identified in the impugned order on which the revisionary authority finds the assessment as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue, and the grievance/s caused to the assessee thereby, and which is therefore the subject matter of the pending appeal by her before the first appellate authority, and toward which we have perused the Grounds even other than Gd. 4 referred to for the purpose before us. Two, even if there is an overlap, inasmuch as no appellate order stands passed u/s.250 of the Act as on the date the proposal u/s. 263 was communicated to the assessee per email, i.e., 28.6.2001, much less the date of the impugned order (31.3.2022), it is the jurisdiction of the appellate authority that would stand excluded to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t from the general Gd.A, warranting no adjudication, and Gd. B qua Explanation 1(c) to s. 263(1), also raised other Grounds, which are on the merits of the observations made by the ld. Pr. CIT. The same are clearly premature as the revisionary authority has not decided the issue/s raised by him on merits, and it is a case of open set aside by him. In fact, as would be apparent from the foregoing, no arguments qua the same were advanced before us. Assessee s appeal is dismissed. - ITA No. 611/Coch/2022 & SA No. 43/Coch/2022 - - - Dated:- 3-2-2023 - S / Shri Sanjay Arora , Accountant Member And Sandeep Gosain , Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Anil D. Nair , Advocate For the Respondent : Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi , Sr. DR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruction nor the rent capitalization method was appropriate to determine the fair market value (fmv) of the capital asset transferred, which included 9.22% share in all amenities, including 4219 sq.ft. of parking place, which valuation was in fact not undertaken by the competent authority inasmuch as it ought to have been by the District Valuation Officer (DVO) and not by the Valuation Officer (VO). (c) The assessee s undivided share in land sold was in fact at 23.115 cents out of a total of 30.865 cents (not 17.25 cents out of a total of 25 cents). The impugned order, accordingly, set aside the assessment dated 28.12.2019 for consideration of the said discrepancies and assessment afresh after referring the valuation to the DVO, and he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icial to the interests of the revenue, he may, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary, pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case justify, including an order enhancing or modifying the assessment or cancelling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment. Explanation 1.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that, for the purposes of this sub-section,- (a) . (b) . (c) where any order referred to in this sub-section and passed by the Assessing Officer had been the subject matter of any appeal filed on or before or after the 1st day of June, 1988, the powers of the Commissioner under this sub-sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matters on which the appellate jurisdiction of the first appellate authority stands since exercised. And which brings us back to our first point, i.e., of there being in fact no overlap of matters raised per the impugned order and being agitated in appeal. 4.3 Continuing further, the plea that the assessment may not survive in view of the assessee s Gd. No. 4 contesting also the year for which the capital gains stands to be arise and, thus, assessed, before the first appellate authority, is, again, to no moment. The same relates to the land transferred on 04.8.2008, while the capital gains assessed for the current year is in respect of the rights retained by the assessee on 04.8.2008, and transferred on 15.10.2011. Even if for the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
