9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se circumstances, in the interest of justice we are of the view that the issue of Fair Market Value of the said two properties as on 1.4.1981 is liable to be restored to the file of the AO who shall obtain a proper valuation from the District Valuation Officer (DVO) in respect of the Fair Market Value of the said properties and re-decide this issue after granting the Assessee adequate opportunity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in the Revenue's appeal, the Revenue has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) in granting relief of ₹ 29,80,000/- disallowed by the AO, being the claim of deduction u/s 54EC over and above the permissible limit of ₹ 50 lacs specified in Sec. 54EC. It was the submission that the Assessee had sold agricultural land and had disclosed Long Term Capital Gains at ₹ 88,84,568 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly held that if the investments are falling in two financial years, the exemption u/s 54EC cannot be restricted. He vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 4. In respect of the Cross objection, it was the submission by the ld. AR that the Assessee has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the valuation for the purpose of indexation as on 1.4.1981 at ₹ 4/sq. mtr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntly, the Tribunal would not be able to make a comparison as to which valuation was correct. At this point, the ld. AR submitted that the Assessee's valuation report was filed before the lower authorities and it has also been referred to by the lower authorities. It was informed to the ld. AR that without seeing the valuation report it would not be possible for the Tribunal to comment on the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
