Appeal allowed for reassessment of FMV and cost of acquisition. Delay condoned. Issues remanded for fresh determination.

The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to the AO/DVO to reassess the Fair Market Value (FMV) and cost of acquisition based on the tribunal's observations. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned due to valid reasons provided by the assessee. The tribunal remanded several issues, including the addition of Long Term Capital Gain, invocation of Section 50C, determination of FMV by the DVO, and the cost of acquisition of the property, for fresh determination considering relevant factors.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Addition of Long Term Capital Gain.
3. Invocation of provisions of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4. Determination of Fair Market Value (FMV) by the DVO.
5. Determination of the cost of acquisition of the property as on 01.04.1981.

Issue-wise Analysis:

1. Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 51 days, supported by an affidavit and medical records. The delay was attributed to the assessee's mother's illness and subsequent death. The tribunal found the reasons reasonable and condoned the delay.

2. Addition of Long Term Capital Gain:
The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 1,72,84,490 as Long Term Capital Gain. The AO had adopted the sale consideration based on the stamp duty value of Rs. 2,61,53,980 against the declared sale consideration of Rs. 1,55,00,000. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's action. The tribunal noted the AO's reliance on the Sub-registrar's revised valuation and the DVO's determination of FMV at Rs. 3,44,91,400. The tribunal found that the property was residential but used for commercial purposes, and thus, applying commercial rates was not justified. The tribunal remanded the issue back to the AO/DVO for redetermination of FMV based on prevailing rates and comparable sales instances.

3. Invocation of Provisions of Section 50C:
The AO invoked Section 50C to adopt the stamp duty value as the sale consideration. The assessee argued that the revised valuation was not in his knowledge, and the AO did not consider the FMV through the DVO due to time constraints. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's action based on the DVO's report. The tribunal remanded the issue for fresh determination of FMV, considering the property as residential.

4. Determination of Fair Market Value (FMV) by the DVO:
The DVO determined the FMV at Rs. 3,44,91,400, considering the property as commercial. The tribunal found that the property was residential, and applying commercial rates was not justified. The tribunal directed the DVO/AO to reconsider the FMV based on residential rates and comparable sales instances.

5. Determination of the Cost of Acquisition of the Property as on 01.04.1981:
The assessee declared the cost of acquisition as Rs. 23,07,171, while the DVO determined it as Rs. 14,03,400. The assessee argued that the comparable sales used by the DVO were not confronted with him and were not similar. The tribunal noted that the DVO's enhancement for the corner location was also not confronted with the assessee. The tribunal remanded the issue to the DVO/AO for fresh determination, considering the assessee's objections.

Conclusion:
The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to the AO/DVO to reassess the FMV and cost of acquisition based on the tribunal's observations.

---