9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1838X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent : MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) COMMON ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. These appeals arise in similar background involving the same assessee. For convenience, we may record facts from Tax Appeal No.233 of 2018. The Revenue has filed this appeal challenging the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 05.05.2017 raising following questions for our cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s pertains to the assessee's capital gain tax liability. The central issue in computing such capital gain tax liability revolves around the ascertainment of the fair market value of the property as on 01.04.1981. The assessee relied on the report of the Government Approved Valuer who estimated the value of the property as on 01.04.1981 as Rs. 1950/per sq. mtr. and Rs. 1550/per sq.mtr. for two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ving perused the documents on record and in particular the impugned judgment of the Tribunal, we see no reason to interfere. As is well known, assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are independent. Merely because a certain addition is made, would not automatically imply that the penalty must be levied. When the Tribunal found that the assessee had made full disclosures and relied on the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
