9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1305X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of LTCG in the assessment order is based on the difference of opinion, which cannot be made basis of the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c). Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the remaining / entire penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.210/SRT/2021 - - - Dated:- 28-7-2022 - Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member And Dr Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member For the Assessee : None (Written Submission) For the Revenue : Shri Shaurya Shaswat Sukla Sr-DR ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/learned CIT(A)dated 28. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arket value as on 1st April 1981 @ Rs. 250/- per square meter on the basis of report of registered valuer and computed loss on sale of such asset. The assessing officer obtained information from the office of sub-registrar Surat and on the basis of such information adopted value of assessee as on 01.04.1981 @ Rs.0.40/- per square meter, thereby making addition of Rs.17,95,600/-.The Assessing Officer at the time of passing assessment order initiated penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c). Aggrieved by the order in the quantum assessment, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), wherein the assessee was granted partial relief vide order dated 04.12.2015. The ld CIT(A) directed to adopt the value of asset as on 01.04.1981 @ Rs. 14.18/- per square met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Officer to recompute the penalty by adopting cost of asset as on 01.04.1981 @ Rs.100/- as held by Tribunal against the rate of @ Rs. 250/- per square meter shown by the assessee. Accordingly as per the order of NFAC/ ld CIT(A) the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was restricted to the extent of Rs.98,406/-. The assessee besides other submission, submitted that in assessee s co-owners Vinaben Pravinbhai Patel, (PAN: ASBPP 6448 G) deleted by NFAC/ ld.CIT(A) in order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1034330303(1) dated 20.07.2021. 5. The assessee further stated that short controversy in the quantum assessment was about the fair market value as on 01.04.1981, the assessee adopted fair market value @ Rs. 250/- square meters on the basis of regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d adopted value @ 40 paisa per square meter as on 01.04.1981 and computed the LTCG of Rs. 17,95,600/-. We find that in quantum appeal Ld. CIT(A) directed to adopt the fair market value cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 @ 14.18/- per square meter and the addition of LTCG was reduced to Rs. 16,35,701/-. And on further appeal before Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No.275/AHD/2016 (supra), the assessing officer was directed to adopt the fair market value @ 100/- per square meter as on 01.04.1981. Consequent upon adopting the fair market value @100/- per square meter as on 01.04.1981, the LTCG was substantially reduced and the penalty under section 271(1) was re-computed at Rs.98,460/-. 8. We have independently examined the fact of the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
