9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the cost of construction in respect of the Land Mark Apartments instead of the actual difference of Rs. 20,52,265 arrived at from the declaration made by the assessee towards the cost of construction at Rs. 50,11,275 and that fixed by the Valuation Officer at Rs.70,63,540 which had been admitted by both the appellate authorities and the same was not disputed ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in merely holding that no error was pointed out in respect of the Appellate Commissioner's orders without independently considering the controversy before it and recording a finding on it ?" 2. The relevant facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee as an individual had filed return for the assessment year 1993-94 onMarch 30, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st of construction estimated by the Valuation Officer and accordingly the Assessing Officer was directed to estimate the profit from the construction activity and subject it to tax and accordingly partly allowed the said appeal. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee had filed the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and it would be of relevance to mention that the Revenue also filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The appeal filed by the Revenue on the above issue was, however, dismissed by con-firming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) with regard to the Land Mark Apartments, "A" Block. Being aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the Revenue has preferred this appeal. 5. We have heard the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter, the authorities could not have concluded that 8 per cent. of the cost of construction as the profit from the construction activity. We find that in the absence of any reasons given to hold the same, the orders of the authorities below deserve to be set aside with a direction to the first appellate authority to reconsider the matter having regard to the material on record furnished by both sides and then to assess the profit from the business (construction activity). 9. The appeal is accordingly allowed by setting aside the order datedJuly 31, 1996by the first appellate authority and the order datedApril 29, 2004passed by the Appellate Tribunal with a direction to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-III to pass a fresh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
