9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, as reproduced hereinabove, for remanding the matters to the A.O. So far as the contention raised by the learned counsel for the respective assessee, as noted hereinaboave, is concerned, the same is rightly rejected by the tribunal by holding that the assessee has failed to demonstrate that he was unable to submit the evidence during the assessment proceedings or unable to take a ground before the A.O. on account of some reasonable cause. No such reasonable cost had been shown before the tribunal. The said evidence was rightly not considered by the A.O., Commissioner and the tribunal. The impugned orders passed by the tribunal in remanding the matter does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. No substantial question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [ a] Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT has erred in law and on facts in not deciding the following grounds raised by the appellant department on merits : ( i). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to adopt the consideration shown by the assessee by holding that assessee has sold the property at prevailing market rate by comparing the same with the jantri rates from valuation officer, without appreciating the fact about evidence on sale consideration. ( ii). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in directing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant department on merits : ( ii). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to adopt the consideration shown by the assessee by holding that assessee has sold the property at prevailing market rate by comparing the same with the jantri rates from valuation officer, without appreciating the fact about evidence on sale consideration. ( ii). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to give deduction of 1/3rd of ₹ 25 lakhs in computation of long term capital gain on account of brokerage paid in relation to the transfer of pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3.02. The Assessment Order passed by the A.O. was challenged by the assessee by way of appeal being Appeal bearing No.CAB/IV-A-367/2011-12 before the CIT(A), Baroda and in appeal the appellate authority vide order dated 27/12/2013 held that the seller had taken possession of the property and the documents of contract to transfer the property for the consideration of immovable property was in writing and signed by the assessee and therefore, all the conditions of provisions of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act read with section 2(47) of the Act stand fulfilled and the assessee has also received consideration and therefore, it is taxable as capital gain. However, it was held that the A.O. had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the A.O. with a direction to decide the issue afresh in the light of the claim of the assessee for substituting the fair market value as on 1/4/1981 as the cost of acquisition. The assessee is directed to furnish necessary details in support of its claim Ground No.3 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. 8. For the sake of completeness of adjudication, we find that the assessee has invested in capital gain exemption bonds and has claimed deduction u/s.54EC of the Act. The A.O. is directed to consider the claim of exemption as per the provisions of the law in light of the relevant CBDT Circular and after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. In the result, all the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expenses. 5.00. Per contra, Ms.Sangeeta Pahwa, learned counsel appearing for the respective assesseee has vehemently opposed both these appeals. She contended that there is no substance in the appeals and both the appeals deserve to be dismissed. She contended that though the tribunal principally agreed with the case of the assessee and held in favour of the assessee, however, erred in remanding the matter. She contended that the tribunal has erred in not considering the additional evidence about Valuation Report of the registered Valuer as on 1/4/1981 and the fair market price as on 1/4/1981 is to be adopted at the cost of acquisition of property only at the option of the assessee. 6.00. Having heard the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
