ITAT held that a scrutiny notice under section 143(2) was...

ITAT held that a scrutiny notice under section 143(2) was invalid because it was not issued in the CBDT-prescribed format, and quashed the assessment as void ab initio. On merits, it held that capital gains on two Mumbai offices were not taxable in the later year because the assessee had already sold the property, handed over possession and received consideration earlier. It allowed cost of improvement for land at Visakhapatnam and accepted the indexed cost and improvement claim for Jagi Road land, holding that old audited book entries and a valuer's report could not be rejected without reasons. It also deleted taxation of rent again in the year of receipt under the mercantile system and allowed club-related business expenditure on commercial expediency.