9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oad width, land cost, FMV of structure, land rate per sqm (as per DVO) etc. The land area of the assessee property is 418.06 square meters whereas the land area of the base line the property at SDA was 337.11 square meters. The road width of the assessee property was 100 ft. and on the main road whereas the road width of the base line the property at SDA was 45 ft. internal road. Further, the assessee property as a back side service lane and base line the property at SDA do not have any service lane. Further, the property of the assessee was valued based on the comparable date of 2nd May, 2001 whereas base line the property at SDA date of sale was 19.10.2000. Thus, the property valued taken by the valuer of the assessee was at a closer date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ernational Taxation, 2(1)(2) (hereinafter referred to as 'Assessing Officer') under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C (13) of the Act is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, reference made by the AO under section 142A of the Act to the valuation officer and consequent valuation report submitted by the District Valuation Officer for estimation of the fair market value of the capital asset is illegal, void and liable to be quashed. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reference to Valuation Officer under Section 142A of the Act cannot be made for the purpose of computing the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the defects pointed out by the assessee in the report submitted by the DVO. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the contention of the assessee that DVO has exceeded his jurisdiction in estimating the value of property as on 01.04.2001 whereas the reference was made to him under Section 142A to estimate the cost of construction of the property. 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has erred in making the reference to the DVO under Section 142A without pointing out any defect or anomaly in the registered valuer report on the basis of which fair market value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,784/- on the basis of report issued by DVO under section 142A of the Act. Disallowance of Rs. 22,61,728/- on account of cost of improvement Disallowance of Rs. 27,49,400/- on account of transfer expenses. 4. The assessee submitted that assessee inherited 50% undivided share in plot and super structure in A-12, Gulmohar Park New Delhi from his father Late Sh. Shadi Lal Kapur vide will testament dated 04.05.1964 and the will/ testament was probated on 07.04.2009. The Assessee submitted the details of Gulmohar property expenses and various documentary evidences, to support its claim of cost of improvement and transfer expenses. 5. The assessee recomputed long term capital gain at Rs. 4,51,44,459/-. Consequently, gross total income increased f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n report dated 18.03.2020 issued by registered valuer Er. B.P. Singh, which was the basis of assessee calculation of cost of acquisition and assessee has valuation report dated 21.05.2022 issued registered valuer Paramjeet Associates to strengthen its contention. It was argued that the Assessing Officer has blindly relied report of the DVO inspite of the objections raised by the assessee on the valuation report given by the DVO. 11. Rebutting the contentions of the Ld. Counsel, the Departmental Representative argued that once the DVO report has available with the Assessing Officer, the AO has to followed the same report in determining the cost of acquisition. 12. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any service lane. Further, the property of the assessee was valued based on the comparable date of 2nd May, 2001 whereas base line the property at SDA date of sale was 19.10.2000. Thus, the property valued taken by the valuer of the assessee was at a closer date than that of the DVO. Hence, keeping in view, the tangible differences it can be held that the absence of any mistake pointed out in the valuation report submitted by the assessee no addition on account of cost of land is warranted in this case. 15. With regard to the brokerage expenses, the copy of the invoice of the broker namely credible Infracon LLP has been provided, the details of payment made by cheque on 10.04.2019 for Rs. 27,14,000/- being 2 percent of the total sale consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
