https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463364 ITAT CHANDIGARH allowed the appeal, holding that where section 49 applies the period of holding for computing indexed cost must include the previous owner's holding. The Tribunal set aside the AO's and CIT(A)'s refusal to recognise the assessee's election under section 55(2)(b)(ii) to adopt fair market value as on 1.4.1981, finding the Patwari certificate and comparable sale prima facie evidence which the revenue failed to rebut. The AO/CIT(A) computation based on the gift deed and 2002-03 base year was held unsustainable. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Aug 2025 18:56:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463364 ITAT CHANDIGARH allowed the appeal, holding that where section 49 applies the period of holding for computing indexed cost must include the previous owner's holding. The Tribunal set aside the AO's and CIT(A)'s refusal to recognise the assessee's election under section 55(2)(b)(ii) to adopt fair market value as on 1.4.1981, finding the Patwari certificate and comparable sale prima facie evidence which the revenue failed to rebut. The AO/CIT(A) computation based on the gift deed and 2002-03 base year was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463364