9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dered view that before the DRP, the assessee had brought on record evidences indicating that the assessee had acquired interest in the rear basement by way of agreement to sell dated 15.04.1994. The fact that this property was rented out and Form 16A against the rent paid by Israel Aircraft Industries Ltd. for the period 01.04.1996 to 31.03.1997 was sufficient piece of evidence to show that the rear basement was acquired before 01.04.2001. Thus, there was no justification for the DRP to disregard the registered valuer s report and instead direct AO to accept the circle rates. Thus, the directions of the DRP to the AO to apply circle rate is also not sustainable and, to that extent, the DRP directions and the findings of the ld. AO in the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave not been considered by the AO in the cost of acquisition - As submitted on behalf of the assessee that stamp duty of Rs. 10 lakhs was paid at the time of sale deed on 09.02.2009, in regard to front portion of the second floor on and a stamp duty of Rs. 7 lakh was paid on the purchase of rear portion of the second floor by sale deed dated 07.02.2009 and, thus, for arriving at the cost of acquisition for second floor, this amount of Rs. 17 lakhs should have been considered. We are of the considered view that apparently, the ld. AO has failed to take note of the directions of the DRP in this regard and, accordingly, we direct the AO to give benefit of the stamp duty for arriving at the cost of acquisition in regard to second floor. As a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 31.03.2021 beyond the time limit as prescribed under proviso to section 143(2) of the Act for the purpose of making assessment under section 143(3) of the Act which renders the notice void ab initio and bad in law. 2. That the Ld. AO has erred in applying the provision of section 144C of the Act and thereby passing draft assessment order without even considering that the assessee cannot be held to be an "eligible assessee" as per section 144C(14)(b) of the Act which is highly arbitrary, unjustified, uncalled for and bad in law. 3. That the assessment order dated 25.07.2022 passed by the Ld. AO is barred by limitation and hence void-ab-initio. 4. That the Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP have erred in law and facts of the case i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es the right to add, amend or modify any ground of appeal." 3. Heard and perused the record. At the outset, we observe that grounds No.1-3 are stated to be not pressed and the ld. AR has submitted that grounds No.8 and 9 are consequential in nature. As regards grounds No.4-7, the ld. AR has made submissions primarily questioning the rejection of valuation report furnished by the assessee and adopting circle rates in regard to indexation of the property. The ld. AR has also submitted that the directions of the DRP have not been followed by the AO at the time of passing final assessment order. Ld DR however relied the orders of Ld. Tax authorities below. 4. It comes up on the basis of the material before us and the submissions that the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Homes Pvt. Ltd, dated 31.03.2023 is made available at pages 145 of the paper book certifying that this invoice No.14 dated 04.12.2018 for Rs. 17,22,800/- was issued to the assessee on account of brokerage on sale of basement of D4/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi and there was a typographical error in mentioning it as ground floor. It is submitted that the assessee has no ownership interest in ground floor of D4/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. 4.4. We are of the considered view that this question of fact needs to be inquired into and, accordingly, subject to verification, this issue is restored to the files of ld. AO. 5. Next regard to the issue of fair market value of the rear basement, we are of the considered view that before the DRP, the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge of Rs. 20,28,125/- in respect of her 50% share in the second floor and the AO ought to have allowed the same in full. A clarification of the broker Satia Homes Pvt. Ltd. dated 31.03.2023 is provided at page 145 certifying and confirming that the assessee was owner of 50% of second floor of D4/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi for which separate tax invoice No.18 dated 04.12.2018 for Rs. 20,28,125/- was issued on account of brokerage to the assessee and the same was paid by her. This amount was inclusive of GST @ 18%. This brokerage amount pertains only to 50% share in the second floor of D4/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. 6.1 We are of the considered view that the facts as brought before us require verification and, therefore, in regard to disallo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
