9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 1145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. 16th Dec., 2003 where it had held that the fair market value as on 1st April, 1981 of shade trees was ₹ 35 per square feet based on the certificate issued by the competent authority i.e., Dy. Conservator of Forest should be rectified with the value as on 1st April, 1981 by adopting ₹ 75 per square feet as held in one other case by the Tribunal that is in the case of Sangameshwara Coffee Estate ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the fair market value of the shade trees can be taken at 70 per cent of the sale consideration as on 1st April, 1981 even though it is not based on only facts nor it is based on the similar case wherein the price has been referred for the relevant period based on similarity of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value of the timber sold by the respondent-assessee pursuant to permission granted to cut and sell the excess shade trees in the estate of the assessee. The return of income was filed for the asst. yrs. 1998-99 and 1999-2000, The assessee's contention was 70 per cent of the sale consideration received by it has to be treated towards the cost of the timber as on 1st April, 1981, in order to compute the capital gains. But it is the case of the Revenue that it has to be arrived at a cost of ₹ 24.5 per cubic feet. Accordingly, the order was passed by the AO against which an appeal was preferred before the CIT(A), which also came to be dismissed. Against which the second appeal was preferred by the respondent-assessee before the Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber at ₹ 35 per cubic feet. But in the miscellaneous application, the Tribunal has allowed the application in toto treating the value as stated by the assessee. On perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal both on the original appeal as well as on the miscellaneous petition, we are of the view that the order of the Tribunal is perverse as the same is not passed on actual fact and without considering the market value on record. In such circumstances, we are of the view that if the order of the Tribunal is perverse and contrary to the market value on record, substantial questions of law arise. Therefore, we are required to overrule the objections of the assessee and consider the case of the Revenue. 7. After hearing the counsel fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
