<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (3) TMI 341 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64295</link>
    <description>Declared sale consideration cannot be substituted by an estimated market value for capital gains in the absence of material showing extra consideration, so the assessee&#039;s declared value for the Ashok Vihar property was accepted. A reference under section 55A is confined to capital gains computation and cannot be used to support an addition as unexplained investment under section 69, so the reference for the New Rohtak Road property was invalid. A valuation report obtained on such an invalid reference had no evidentiary value, and the addition based on the higher valuation was unsustainable. The properties were therefore to be taken at the values declared by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 10:22:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 341 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64295</link>
      <description>Declared sale consideration cannot be substituted by an estimated market value for capital gains in the absence of material showing extra consideration, so the assessee&#039;s declared value for the Ashok Vihar property was accepted. A reference under section 55A is confined to capital gains computation and cannot be used to support an addition as unexplained investment under section 69, so the reference for the New Rohtak Road property was invalid. A valuation report obtained on such an invalid reference had no evidentiary value, and the addition based on the higher valuation was unsustainable. The properties were therefore to be taken at the values declared by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64295</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>