9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 901X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... common set of facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of though this common order, for the sake of convenience. 2 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that both the appeals are barred by limitation of 93 days. The ld. AR of the assessee has furnished a letter owning up responsibility for the delay on account of some personal inconveniences. Accordingly, we are of the view that there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing both these appeals before the Tribunal. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3 The common issue urged in both these appeals relate to the issue of adoption of market value as on 01-04-1981 while computing capital gains on sale of a plot, in which both the assessees herei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rties and perused the record. Before us, the assessees did not dispute the adoption of DLC value as Sale consideration in terms of sec. 50C of the Act. The dispute is related to the determination of the FMV as on 1.4.1981. It is the case of the assessees that they have adopted the value as determined by a registered valuer. 7. We notice that the DLC value in 1983 was shown as Rs.60/- per sq. Ft. The valuer of the assessee has discounted the above said rate in order to arrive at value as on 01-04-1981 at Rs.42/- per sq. Ft. On the contrary, the ld. CIT(A) has noticed that the DLC rate of Rs.60/- per sq.ft. in 1983 has increased to Rs.120/- in 1987 resulting in an average increase of Rs.15/- per sq. ft. The Ld CIT(A) adopted the discounting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... valuer is more acceptable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, we are of the view that FMV as on 01- 04-1981 should be adopted at Rs.42 per sq. ft. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the ld. CIT(A) in both the cases and direct the AO to recompute LTCG by adopting FMV as on 01-04-1981 at Rs.42 per sq. Ft. 10 In the case of Shri Uttam Chand Singhi, the assessee has raised one more ground with regard to the claim for deduction u/s 54 of the Act. The assessee did not claim deduction u/s 54 of the Act in the return of income, but claimed the same for the first time before the ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee did not produce any documentary evidence with regard to the said claim, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the same. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
