9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Industrial shed in rural area is Rs. 11,200/- per square meter. Hence, direct the assessing officer to recalculate the value of industrial shed/ constructed portion @ 8646/- per square meter (depreciation for 19 ys @1.2 % i.e. 22.80% of Rs. 11,200/-). And to take the value of land of plot No. 4/B @ 580/ per square meter and for plot No. G-1 @ 600/-per square meter as there is no much variation in the rate of land in the report of DVO and Government approved valuer. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed. - ITA No. 400/Srt/2019 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2023 - Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Miss Chaitali Shah, C.A. For the Department : Shri Vinod Kumar Sr. DR ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 11/06/2019 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in partly confirming the action of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom other sources . 3. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee besides challenging the addition on merit, also raised specific ground that the assessee purchased very old buildings in a damaged condition. Such fact was not appreciated by the Assessing Officer and not allowing depreciation while consideration the value of property. The assessee also filed detailed written submissions. The submission of assessee is recorded in para 5 of order of ld. CIT(A). The assessee in its submission submitted that the assessee purchased the property which was 15 to 20 years old. The assessed value of these properties as per record of local authority is Rs. 25.00 lacs and Rs. 15.00 lacs only. The assessee further stated that the construction of work of industrial property, a maximum cost of construction is Rs. 500/- per square fit thereby Rs. 5,380/- per square meter. However, the Jantri rate is Rs. 11,200/- per square meter which is absolutely on higher side in case of industrial property. The assessee submitted that he has submitted valuation of properties by the Government Approved Valuer. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he has taken four sale instances at fair market value of Rs. 626/- per square meter of plot No. G-1 and Rs. 594/- per square meter for plot No. 4/B. The area of plot No. G-1 is 768.50 square meter and plot NO/ 4/B is 870.50 square meter. The DVO has taken a comparable instances of having area of 97.58 square meter, 84.58 square meter and 171.10 square meter. The ld. CIT(A) was of the view that there is a vast difference in the size of plots comparable to the plots of assessee. 5. The ld. CIT(A) also considered the report of registered valuer and noted that same is not based on sale instances but on general observation and he adopted rate of Rs. 5,000/- per square meter for plot No. G-1 and Rs. 4300/- per square meter for plot No. 4/B without any comparable instances (including cost of construction). Hence, the report of registered valuer was also not accepted. However, the ld. CIT(A) find that the assessee has objected the report of DVO @ Rs. 13,600/- per square meter for 20 years old building is on higher side and he has shown the value on the basis of registered valuer at Rs. 5,380/- per square meter. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) adopted the average of both the valuation report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ld AR for the assessee in her submissions has relied on hypothetical preposition which is not supported with any evidences available on record. 9. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities, including the valuation reports of Government Approved valuer and report of DVO, carefully. I have also deliberated on the various case laws relied by the ld AR for the assessee. The assessing officer made addition of Rs. 25,41,575/- being difference in value adopted by stamp valuation and the value shown on the sale deeds, by taking view that he has made reference to DVO, at the instance of assessee and that the report of DVO is not received and the matter was going to be time barred, accordingly he made addition of differential amount of Rs. 25,41,575/- under section 56(2) (vii) (b) in the head other sources . Before ld CIT(A) the assessee raised various plea by filing detailed written submission as recorded above. The assessee also furnished valuation report prepared by Government approved valuer. I find that the report of DVO was also received by that time of hearing in first appeal / ld CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) inste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
