9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in directing the AO to accept the fair market value of land as on 01.04.1981 at Rs. 135/- per square yard as taken by the assessee by ignoring the facts that the copy of order of ADM (Finance), Meerut furnished by the assessee is neither signed by the ADM nor it contains the circle rate of land situated at village Gesupur Dattawali? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in applying the circle rate of the urban areas of Meerut City to the land situated at village Gesupur Dattawali which is outside the urban limits? 4. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e value of land at Rs.22/- per sq. yard. On appeal, the CIT(A) accepted the assessee's contention and directed the Assessing Officer to compute the capital gain by accepting fair market value of the land as on 01.04.1981 at Rs.135/- per sq. yard. The relevant findings of the CIT(A) read as under:- "4.4 Decision & reasons therefor: I have gone through the AO's order, the AR's submissions and relevant facts of the case carefully. I find that the AO has distorted glaring facts. It is not possible to agree with the AO for the following reasons: i. The AO's main reason for not accepting the appellant's adoption of FMV for the property (land measuring 15,500 sq. yard) sold @ Rs.135/- per square yard is that the ADM's letter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on National Highway. It is very close to Medical College and is covered under new abadi area. iv. AR's submission that based on the circle rate the total consideration should have been Rs.22,09,860/- whereas the land was actually sold for Rs.l,03,00,000/- carries weight in terms of showing the actual value of land. The land also had 62 trees on it, each being of the value of Rs. 10,000/- as per the deed. In my view, the appellant could have calculated FMV even at the rate of Rs.200/- per square yard which would have been permissible. It was, however, taken at Rs.135/- only. In view of all relevant facts, I find no basis on the part of the AO for having calculated FMV by adopting the rate of Rs.22 per square yard. It amounts to flagrant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not been controverted by the revenue. In fact, a copy of notification was already produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer who refused to accept it because the same was not signed by ADM(Finance). Now, this dispute does not survive because the assessee has obtained the certified copy of the notification under the Right to Information Act. Considering the circle rate fixed by ADM (Finance) for the purpose of levy of stamp duty on sale of land in that area, the fair market value of land adopted by CIT(A) at Rs.135/- per sq. yard cannot be said to be excessive or unreasonable. We, therefore, find no justification to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). The same is upheld and the revenue's appeal is dismissed. 4. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
