9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1526X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SHAH AND MR. B.N. KARIA, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE FOR THE OPPONENT : MR SN SOPARKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR B S SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the learned tribunal ) dated 11/04/2016 in 2694/Ahd/2012 for the Assessment Year 2009-10, revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed questions of law; (A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding in directing AO to re-compute the capital gain by adopting the cost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case and in law, the ITAT erred in holding that the Revenue has also not placed any material on record, demonstrating the prevalent market rate as on 01/04/1981 in the close vicinity of land in question , without appreciating that the AO estimated value of the land as on 01/04/1981 on the basis of information collected from Sub Registrar and other factual information and parameters and the AO in the assessment order recorded comparable instances of the value of property as on 01/04/1981 in the assessment order? (F) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in disallowance made under Section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the expenses which are relatabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er cannot be adopted? (D) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in holding that both the authorities below are not justified in adopting the rate, as the assessee had furnished a report from an expert i.e. Govt. approved valuer, when the ITAT had not accepted the valuation adopted by the Government approved valuer? (E) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT erred in holding that the Revenue has also not placed any material on record, demonstrating the prevalent market rate as on 01/04/1981 in the close vicinity of land in question , without appreciating that the AO estimated value of the land as on 01/04/1981 on the basis of information collected from Sub Reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
