9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1042X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting fair market value of the property - HELD THAT:- AO in the assessment order has stated that as per the Sale Deed, the value of property estimated by Stamp Valuation Authority at ₹ 47,25,000/- and computed long term capital gain at ₹ 27,25,000/-. But Ld. CIT(A) adopted the value at ₹ 38,95,000/-. As find that there is a discrepancy in the value stated in the reasons and adopted while framing the assessment, Ld. CIT(A) has not addressed this issue - we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue of valuation of the property to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same after adverting to the issue regarding discrepancy in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer and finally value adopted by him u/s. 50C of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the AVO at ₹ 43,03,000/- which includes the salvage of boundary wall at ₹ 28,000/- is arbitrary, unjust, not based on material deserve to be ignored. 5) That the CIT(A) had erred facts under the law relying upon the sale deed of higher price instead of lower price as pointed out by assessee and consequently the addition of ₹ 27,25,000/- sustained by CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjust, devoid of any merit, and at any rate very excessive. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time hearing before us. It is seen from the record that the assessee has not been appearing since filing of the appeal. Various o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of comparable sale under consideration adopted at sale consideration of ₹ 38,95,000/-. 5. Aggrieved against this, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 in assessee's appeal are in respect of the legality of the re-opening of the assessment. 7. Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer has duly recorded reasons for re-opening of the assessment. He took me through the assessment order wherein the Assessing Officer has reproduced the reasons. Ld. Sr. DR submitted that there was reason to believe that income has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. He submitted that the assessee has not disclosed any capital gain in the return of income. 8. I have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or stamp duty and sale consideration. hence, the AO has reason to believe that the income of the assessee amounting to ₹ 7,02,000/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act and the escapement of income is purely on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts by filing the return for the A.Y. 2007-08. 12. Further, the Assessing Officer in the assessment order has stated that as per the Sale Deed, the value of property estimated by Stamp Valuation Authority at ₹ 47,25,000/- and computed long term capital gain at ₹ 27,25,000/-. But Ld. CIT(A) adopted the value at ₹ 38,95,000/-. I find that there is a discrepancy in the value sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
