9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 784X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have accepted the report of the registered valuer merely because there was no other evidence to rebut the report of the registered valuer, No specific instances were produced by the assessee, finding of the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal, against the assessee cannot be held to be a perverse finding, appeal is dismissed - I T APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2010 - - - Dated:- 21-7-2010 - ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. S.K. Mukhi for the Appellant. ORDER Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 24.6.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', (hereinafter referred to as "the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CIT(A) never conformed to the procedure of law regarding enhancement of income which is against the provisions of law and thus needs consideration by this Hon'ble Court? IV. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the findings of ITAT are perverse and against the evidences on record thus unsustainable in law? V. Whether the ITAT has misdirected itself in being influenced by irrelevant factors and applying erroneous criteria while deciding the issue in dispute?" 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee sold a plot by adopting sale consideration of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- and the cost of acquisition as on 1.4.1981 was taken at Rs. 26,13,850/-. The Assessing Officer did not accept the cost of acquisitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified. The CIT (Appeals) observes that the rate adopted by the assessee, based on the report of the Registered Valuer, is without any basis. In this connection, we have perused the valuation report dated 19.3.2005 of the registered valuer, a copy of which is placed on record. It is discernible from the report, that no basis has been referred to by the Registered Valuer to adopt the rate of land at Rs. 1260/- per sq. yds. On the contrary, the CIT (Appeals) has referred to the rate at which land allotment was being done by the authorities at the relevant point of time. The evidence sought to be relied upon by the CIT (Appeals), when compared with bald unsupported assertion of the Registered Valuer, in our view, deserves to be preferred. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubject of course, to it being valued at 50% of the amount estimated by the Registered Valuer. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and direct the Assessing Officer to re-work the cost of acquisition on the above lines and recomputed the Long Term Capital gains." 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the report of the registered valuer was produced by the assessee but the Assessing Officer and the appellate authorities have not accepted the same without any basis. 5. We are unable to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. It was not incumbent upon the Assessing Officer or the appellate authorities to have accepted the rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
