9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs the valuation report a bald one. Accordingly I am of the view that the valuation report furnished by the assessee may not come to its help for the reasons discussed above. CIT(A) has determined the value of ₹ 1,71,000/- on the basis of sale instance of a flat located in the same society that took place on 23.11.1983. In fact, the above said sale agreement was furnished by the assessee before the AO. Even though sale instance is subsequent to the valuation date of 1.4.1981, yet the Ld CIT(A) has adopted the same without discounting the same. Since the sale instance is a better evidence and in the absence of any other material, Ld CIT(A) was justified in adopting the fair market value as on 1.4.1981 at ₹ 1,71,000/-. Accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Department : Shri Ram Tiwari ORDER The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04- 11-2016 passed by Ld CIT(A)-25, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2011-12. The issues urged by the assessee relates to the computation of long term capital gain on sale of a flat and deduction claimed u/s 54EC of the Act. 2. I heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee society purchased four plots of freehold land in 1970 in Garodia Nagar, Ghatkopar east, Mumbai. The chief promoter and secretary of the society named Shri V. Srinivasan purchased a flat for a sum of ₹ 38,000/-. Subsequently, consequent to the enquiry conducted on him for losses implicated on the society, the assessee herei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of sale instance of a sale that took place on 23.11.1983. He confirmed the order of AO in restricting the deduction u/s 54EC of the Act at ₹ 50.00 lakhs and also confirmed the order of the AO in restricting the deduction for expenses to ₹ 20,000/-. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The first issue relates to the determination of Fair Market Value as on 1.4.1981. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee had obtained a valuation report from a registered valuer, who had estimated the fair market value as on 1.4.1981 of the flat at ₹ 3,33,000/. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee had submitted the same before the AO before the finalisation of the assessment order, but the AO did not co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aluation date of 1.4.1981, yet the Ld CIT(A) has adopted the same without discounting the same. Since the sale instance is a better evidence and in the absence of any other material, I am of the view that the Ld CIT(A) was justified in adopting the fair market value as on 1.4.1981 at ₹ 1,71,000/-. Accordingly I uphold his order passed on this issue. 8. The next issue urged by the assessee relates to the deduction of professional fee of ₹ 10,000/- paid to M/s B.R Dalal Co for tax consultation and ₹ 20,000/- paid to Shri A.G. Pandit for drafting agreement for sale and transfer of shares of the flat. 9. The Ld A.R contended that these expenses have been incurred in connection with the transfer of flat and hence they s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
