9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 944X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f being heard, without providing the valuation report and erred in passing the order under section 154 of the Act by taking FMV of the property C-44 South Extn., Part-II, New Delhi as on 01/04/1981 at Rs 17,50,850/- (as assessed by the VO u/s 55A of the Act) against returned cost of Rs 28,97,254/- in order to derive the figure for capital gain on the sale of said property. The action of the Ld. CIT (A) is arbitrary, unjustified and against the provisions of the law and such order shall be treated as null and void. All grounds of appeal are interlinked/same therefore, have tax effect of Rs. 3055310/- in aggregate/all. 2. Without prejudiced to the above provision, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Delhi 42 has furthermore err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... All grounds of appeal are interlinked/same therefore, have tax effect of Rs. 3055310/- in aggregate/all. 4. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- Delhi-42 has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the capital gain arisen on the sale of property C-44 South Extn., Part-II, New Delhi and thereby completely ignoring the submissions made by the assessee and the valuation report of the approved valuer submitted by the assessee. The action of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Delhi 42 is arbitrary, unjustified and against the provisions of the law and such order shall be treated as null and void. All grounds of appeal are interlinked/same therefore, have tax effect of Rs. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered valuer, if the Assessing Officer is of opinion that the value so claimed is at variance with its fair market value; (b) in any other case, if the Assessing Officer is of opinion- (i) that the fair market value of the asset exceeds the value of the asset as claimed by the assessee by more than such percentage of the value of the asset as so claimed or by more than such amount as may be prescribed in this behalf; or (ii) that having regard to the nature of the asset and other relevant circumstances, it is necessary so to do, and where any such reference is made, the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of section 16A, clauses (ha) and (i) of subsection (1) and sub-sections (3A) and (4) of section 23, subsection (5) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etermined at Rs. 11,157/- per sq. yards and cost of construction is determined at Rs. 120/- per sq. ft. as on 01.04.1981. On the other hand, the departmental valuation officer determined the cost of land at Rs. 6,895/- per sq. yards and cost construction was determined at Rs. 53/- per sq. ft. The DVO has not considered any comparable cases of the relevant year while determining the value. Further, the DVO has worked backwards deducting 1.5%/month for 27 months from the value of 1983 rates. Thus, the DVO deducted 41.41% from the value of the properties in 1983 for determining the value in 1981. In other words, the DVO assumed a rise of 41% from 1981 to 1983. Hence, the methodology applied by the DVO has got inbuilt incongruencies, hence cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
