9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 46,916/-. The Tribunal rightly deleted the addition. Second property, Tribunal rightly observed that the DVO had valued the property on 18.11.2008 ignoring the vital fact that the property was acquired in the year 2003 and registered on 03.03.2004 with the constructed house thereon. There was no evidence to support the addition. The same was, therefore, rightly set aside. Third propert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to have been considered with respect to the relevant assessment year, namely, 2003-2004. At that time, the rent was about 1/10th of the rent in the year 2007-2008. The addition was, therefore, rightly deleted. - Decided against revenue. - ITA Nos. 92 & 94-2015 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 21-5-2015 - S J Vazifdar, ACJ And G S Sandhawalia,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Tajender K Joshi, Adv For t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. In respect of the first property, the difference in valuation of the plot by the assessee and DVO came to ₹ 1,18,887/-. The Tribunal noted that no comparable sale instance had been given and that there was no incriminating material which could justify the addition made. The Assessing Officer had added an amount of only ₹ 46,916/-. The Tribunal rightly deleted the addition. 4. Wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rebate of 15% on account of difference between the CPWD rates and the PWD rates and 5% on account of self-supervision. The Tribunal, therefore, after balancing the factors reduced the addition to ₹ 1,61,542/-. There is no warrant for interfering with the discretion. 6. The last property was valued at ₹ 48,60,000/- by capitalizing the rent. However, the rent was taken as prevalent i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
