9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dopt the same. Therefore, find no interference in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and accordingly dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue. - I.T.A.No.552/Viz/2019 - - - Dated:- 13-10-2022 - Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon ble Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri GVN Hari, AR For the Respondent : Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR ORDER PER SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Condonation of Delay : This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, [CIT(A)], Vijayawada in Appeal No.10256/CIT(A)/VJA/18-19 dated 11.06.2019 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011-12 with the delay of 11 days. The revenue filed petition for condonation of delay, submitting that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee by way of inheritance and the previous owner acquired the property prior to 01.04.1981, it was stated by the Assessing Officer (AO) that the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property as on 01.04.1981 has to be taken as the cost of acquisition of the property from the purpose of computing the income from LTCG arising on sale of the said property. The assessee could not obtain the certificate of market value of the property as on 01.04.1981 as the records of the Sub-Registrar were destroyed for the period prior to 01.01.1989 due to riots. The assessee therefore obtained the certificate issued by the Joint Sub-Registrar, Vijayawada regarding Market Value of the said property as on 01.01.1989 and adopted the said value of Rs.4,25,215/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me owner of 50% of the property on account of inheritance from her husband, which is one of the modes of acquisition specified in Sec.49(1) and the previous owner acquired the property before 01.04.1981, the cost of purchase of the property by the previous owner or the FMV of the property as on 01.04.1981, at the option of the assessee, is required to be adopted as the cost of acquisition of the property for the purpose of computing the capital gains income arising from the sale of the property as per the provisions of Sec.55(2)(b). The assessee opted to adopt the FMV of the property as on 01.04.1981 as the cost of acquisition of the property. But the AO worked out the LTCG income at Rs.10,89,702/-, estimating the market value of the proper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. The Ld.CIT(A) is not justified in allowing the appeal without taking into account the facts and merits of the case. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) simply allowed the appeal filed by the assessee ignoring the fact that the reverse formula adopted by the CIT(A) would work out the market value to Rs.18,77,808/- as against the market value of Rs.2,48,66,400/- adopted by teh SRO at the time of registration of the property through the Regd.deed dated 25.11.2010 (Rs.2,64,108/- x 711/100 = Rs.18,77,808) which is far below the market value adopted by the SRO at the time of Registration i.e. on 25.11.2010. 3. Any other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing. Bes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 61 (Andhra Pradesh)/[2013] 218 Taxman 74 (Andhra Pradesh) and pleaded to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the revenue. 9. I have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Hyderabad Vs. Ashven Datla (supra). Relevant part of order is extracted as under : ....it is prudent on the part of the lower authorities to estimate the fair market value as on 01.04.1981 on the basis of the valuation officer s report, which was arrived at by the reverse indexation method. Consequently the Tribunal ruled as a question of fact that the property would fetch Rs.7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
