9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 815X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be taken. In addition to cost of boundary wall as taken by the DVO also considered for cost of acquisition. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the addition so made. - ITA No. 89/JP/2020 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2020 - Shri Ramesh C Sharma, AM And Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM For the Assessee : Shri R.P. Sharma (CA) For the Revenue : Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 15/01/2020 for the A.Y. 2011-12 in the matter of order passed U/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in issuing the notice U/s 143(2) as per guidelines issued by the CBDT nor it is generated on portal. 2. Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred not considering the situation of land which is situated in ecological zone on which section 50C or DLC rate nor applicable as compared with other land. 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d through ITBA portal. (PB Page No. 21 to 25). (v) When we took the grounds of appeal before the Ld. CIT (A) about the not issuing of Notice u/s 143(2) of IT Act than Ld A.O. submitted a manual notice receipt by son of assessee, although we have submitted an affidavit (PB Page No. 26) before the CIT (Appeal) that assessee did not received notice u/s 143(2) of IT Act. We got certified copy from the Ld. A.O. of the notice u/s 143(2) of Income Tax Act. Copy of Notice enclosed (PB Page No. 27) But surprisingly there is no dispatch no. on the notice, it is type written prepared manually and signature is also made of son of assessee, which we denied that the signature of son of assessee Sh. Rishab Jain. (vi) That a show cause notice has been issued by Ld A.O. on 24.12.2018 from ITBA portal then why notice u/s 143(2) dt 24.12.2018 has not been generate from the portal. So it is very much clear that notice u/s 143(2) has not been generated validly. (vii) That the date of receipt of notice is also not mentioned on so called notice u/s 143(2) of IT Act. So we submit that no notice u/s 143(2) of IT Act has been originated, issued only a manual notice which has been prepared wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing on the above land according to notification 19th August 2011 placed at PB Page No. 33 to 34 which reads as under: Notified Area vide publication No. 2/2011 dated 13th august 2011 and issued dictions in exercise of powers under clause (v) of sub section 2 of section 3 of the aforesaid act, to impose prohibition and restriction on the construction, installation of any structure for extraction of ground water resources etc. to avoid its further depletion and deterioration in the area. So above land is not useable for residential purpose and commercial purpose. (Copy of order of Ground water authority are placed at PB Page No. 35 to 37. (iii) Plotting and Housing activities completely restricted by JDA in ecological zone. (iv) Assessee can use the land for some specified purposes notified by local authority, but minimum 12-meter road is necessary. In assessee s land only 3-4-meter road available which is also not official road. (v) In the above Ecological Zone water bodies, Regional Park, Botanical Garden, Orchard Nursery, Zoological Garden, Swimming Pool, Play Ground, Farm House, Outdoor Stadium, Gas Godown and some other activities allowed but for all the ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is a wide gap in land rate as given by Registered Valuer and actual sale instances cited by the DVO. The Registered Valuer had simply stated in the Valuation Report that the rate of land as on 01-04-1981 is ₹ 1400/- per sq. yard based on local survey. No sale instance is quoted to arrive at such rate by Registered Valuer. Thus Registered Valuer s valuation of land @ ₹ 1400/- per square yard is not based on any independent supporting document. It is simply mentioned in the valuation report that rate is based on local survey. However, what evidences were gathered in the survey to arrive at such rate is not provided. Therefore, in my considered view the value adopted by the Registered Valuer at ₹ 1400/- per sq. yard is very high and unreasonable. The DVO had given sale instances of the same locality. The assessee relied on sale instances which are from far away areas from the location of concerned property. Keeping all these relevant facts in view, the rate adopted by ITAT, Jaipur bench in first round at ₹ 300/- per sq. yard is quite fair and reasonable. Hence, the Bench directs to adopt the fair market value @ ₹ 300/- per sq. yard as on 01-04-1981 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
