9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same were heard together and are now being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience, by dealing with the facts of the case of Assessee's WTA No. 9/Del/2014 (AY 2007-08). 2. The following commons grounds raised in all the Appeals of the Assessee, but for the sake of brevity, we are only reproducing the grounds of appeal in respect of assessment year 2007-08 as under:- "A. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A)-XXV grossly erred in confirming the action of the learned DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi in estimating the market value of the following properties of the appellant a. 111/36, Kulri, Mussoorie at Rs. 65,OO,OOO/- as against the declared fair market price of Rs. 20,OO,OOO/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CWT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 33,00,000/- made by AO in respect of property at Mussorie. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any / all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." Assessee's WTA No. 9/Del/2014 (AY 2007-08) 4. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and filed its return of wealth in accordance with Section 14 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 declaring net wealth of Rs. 76,75,2090/- on 31.3.2007. The case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny and notices u/s. 16(2) of the Wealth Tax Act were issued inviting the assessee to submit the details inter alia in respect of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Act, 1957 1 111/36, Kulri, Mussorie 1012 sq. yd. FY 1987-88 20,00,000 65,00,000 2 E-203, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi 128 sq.yd. FY 2005-06 20,00,000 50,00,000 3 House No. 602, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi 200 sq.yd. FY 1994 15,00,000 70,00,000 4 17A/59, WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi 117.11 sq.yd. FY 2004-05 39,80,000 70,00,000 5 KN/F-14, Rai Kedar Nath Marg, Anand Parbat Industrial Delhi 200 sq.yd. purchased long back. 7,00,000 40,00,000 6 one bigha two biswa in village Mehraulli 7,00,000 Accepted 4.1 Against the order of the Wealth Tax Officer, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CWT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 05.3.2014 has partly allowed the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO to accord with the market values of such properties, the assessee was questioned about the basis of the values adopted by it in respect of the above properties. The basis as explained to the AO by the assessee was that the rates were obtained 'as per enquiries made'. However, the assessee failed to produce the evidence of the enquiries made or the basis adopted by like the municipal valuation of such properties or the circle or lands rates as fixed by the Local Commissioner before AO on demand by the latter. The AO estimate the values of properties as indicated below and assessed the net wealth of the assessee at Rs. 2,68,77.200/- as against Rs. 76,75,209/- on estimate basis vide his order dated 31.12.2009. S.No. Description of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee at Rs. 2,68,77.200/- as against Rs. 76,75,209/- on estimate basis vide his order dated 31.12.2009. After hearing both the parties and perusing the records especially the orders passed by the revenue authorities, we are of the view that the AO has given full opportunity to the assessee for substantiating its claim before him, but the assessee has not produced any evidence with respect to his contention relating to adoption of value of properties for Wealth Tax purposes and even before the Ld. CIT(A) and also before us. However, keeping in view of the tax effect involved in the case, being old matter and in the interest of justice, we are inclined to not set aside the issue in dispute to the AO and giving liberty to assessee to produce t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cord. We note that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, therefore, the Department's Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) by the CBDT. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para nos. 3 & 10 of the aforesaid CBDT's Circular are reproduced as under:- "3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: S No Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
