9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Tribunal, therefore, accepted the valuation of ₹ 2833/- per marla as contended by the assessee and rejected the valuation of ₹ 1118/- per marla as contended on behalf of the department. The Tribunal thereafter valued the land as on 19.12.2001 i.e. the date on which the land was transferred by the assessee/erstwhile firm upon the dissolution of the firm. In this regard, the Tribunal accepted the rate of ₹ 12,500/- per marla as contended by the assessee and did not accept the rate of ₹ 45,350/- per marla as computed by the Valuation Officer and accepted by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal rightly noted that the sale instances relied upon by the Assessing Officer were irrelevant as they pertained to small piec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the Assessing Officer to compute the capital gains on the basis of the valuation indicated in the order. The matter pertains to the assessment year 2002-2003. 2. The appellant contends that the following issues raise substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon ble ITAT has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to adopt the value as on 01.04.1981 at the rate of ₹ 2,833/- per marla without appreciating the material on record and without taking into account the report of the Valuation Officer who took 12 instances including 2 sale instances given by the assessee in arriving at value of 1118 per marla of the land as on 01.04.1981 and thus vitiating its de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Copies of registered sale deeds were relied upon in this regard. The Tribunal's reliance upon the instances of sale furnished by the assessee cannot be said to be perverse or irrational. Absent anything else, proximity of the land in question is not only an important, but a relevant factor. The Tribunal, therefore, accepted the valuation of ₹ 2833/- per marla as contended by the assessee and rejected the valuation of ₹ 1118/- per marla as contended on behalf of the department. 5. The Tribunal thereafter valued the land as on 19.12.2001 i.e. the date on which the land was transferred by the assessee/erstwhile firm upon the dissolution of the firm. In this regard, the Tribunal accepted the rate of ₹ 12,500/- per ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
