9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 711X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see has challenged the impugned order of the Ld. CIT -30, Mumbai dated 15.09.2010 for the A.Y. 2005-06. The solitary issue in controversy is whether the A.O. is justified in making the reference to DVO for determining the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property as on 01.04.1981. 2. The facts in brief are as under. The assessee has sold the building named as 'Liberty Lodge' and declared lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty as on 01.04.1985 at ₹ 11,87,127/- in which the assessee's share was worked out at ₹ 2,55,826/- as second floor was constructed in 1985. The A.O. accordingly worked out the capital gain by adopting the FMV on the basis of the valuation report in which FMV of the property was determined as on 01.04.1981 and 01.04.1985. The Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the said valuation. Now, the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of CIT vs. Daulal Mohata HUF -I.T.A. No 1031 of 2008, Judgement dated 22.09.2008. He pleaded for deleting the addition made by the A.O. We have also heard the Ld. D.R. 4. We have already put all the facts on record. The short issue in controversy is whether the A.O. had authority to refer the matter for valuation u/s.55A, to find out whether the assessee has declared excess FMV as cost of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
