9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /1981. Needless to direct that before passing the order on this issue/claim, AO shall grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee and to pass the order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to provide complete details to the assessing officer and not to cause further delay. In the result, the limited submissions made by the assessee against various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. - ITA No. 480/SRT/2018 - - - Dated:- 15-7-2022 - Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member And Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Hiren Vepari, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER: PAWAN SINGH ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the order of ld. CIT(A), has not allowed indexation value of asset as on 01/04/1981. Though, the assessee raised a specific ground of appeal before the ld. CIT(A) for allowing of indexation value of asset as on 01/4/1981. The assessee under legal advice filed appeal before Ld CI(A), against the action of assessing officer of order giving effect. The assessee under bonafide believe was pursuing remedy before ld CIT(A). The assessee filed said appeal on 04.05.3017 and the same was dismissed on 31.05.2018. 4. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that under the bonafide belief, the assessee was pursuing alternative remedy in filing appeal before ld CIT(A) by filing appeal against the order giving effect by assessing officer to save the time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no relief about indexation cost was allowed by ld. CIT(A). The assessee ought to have filed appeal before the Tribunal and pursuing alleged alternative remedy is not helpful to the assessee. 6. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the affidavit of assessee for condonation of delay. There is no dispute that the impugned order was passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 03/02/2017 and that the present appeal is filed only on 10/07/2018, thus there is inordinate delay in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. It is a matter of fact that against the order giving effect the assessee filed appeal before ld CIT(A) for seeking indexation cost. The Assessing Officer passed order giving effect on the order of ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uction of taxed value of fair market value of asset as on 01/04/1981. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, we find that the assessee was wrongly pursuing the remedy before the ld. CIT(A) instead of filing appeal before the Tribunal, therefore, we find a reasonable cause in not filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Further considering the fact that if we exclude the time spent in pursuing remedy before the wrong forum i.e. from 04/04/2017 till 01/06/2018, the appeal filed by assessee would be within 60 days of period of limitation for filing appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The Hon ble Jammu Kashmir High court in Faisal Hameed Vs ITAT Anr (supra) has held that the assessee pursuing one remedy or the other by filing appeal as pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the assessee in treating deemed value of consideration. The Assessee filed its reply dated 13/3/2015. In reply, the assessee stated that the stamp duty authority determined the value as excessive. The assessee has not received any amount in excess of sale consideration shown on the documents. The assessee requested to refer the matter for valuation by District Valuation Officer (DVO). The Assessing Officer recorded that on the submission of assessee, the matter was referred to DVO. The DVO report was not received till passing of assessment order on 30/03/2015. The Assessing Officer also noted that the assessee furnished the details of fair market value as on 01/4/1981 at Rs. 10,11,132/-. On furnishing such valuation of property, the rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fic ground of appeal vide ground No. 4 that there was no justification for not granting deduction of indexation value of fair market value as on 01/4/1981 . The ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated such ground of appeal while passing the impugned order on 03/2/2017. The ld. AR of the assessee furnished the copy of form No. 35 alongwith grounds of appeal. The ld. AR submits that the assessee is legally entitled for such indexation cost. The ld. AR submits that the Assessing Officer may be directed to allow the indexation cost. 13. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that the issue may be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to consider the indexation cost and passed the order in accordance with law. 14. We ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
