2005 (5) TMI 610

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut of the assessments completed under section 143(3).  2. The assessee had co-ownership in flat No. 9, 2nd floor, Laxmi Bhavan, D-Road, Churchgate, Mumbai and this property was sold for Rs. 3,25,00,000 to Smt.Veena Vasant on November 29, 1995. The property was constructed in 1961 and the assessee opted to adopt the value as on April 1, 1981 for computation of capital gain. The assessee filed the report of the registered valuer Barve Suresh R. and Associates, dated March 1, 1996 who worked out the value at Rs. 24,36,400 as on April 1, 1981. The Assessing Officer however referred the matter to the valuation cell of the Income-tax Department who worked out the value at Rs. 15.74 lakhs as on April 1, 1981. One appeal has been filed agai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r is less than its fair market value and the Assessing Officer could not have formed such opinion as the case of the Assessing Officer is that the fair market value as estimated by the registered valuer as on April 1, 1981 is on the higher side and not on the lower side. He further stated that even if it was assumed that the Assessing Officer had made the said references under section 55A clause (b) subclause (ii) then it was necessary for him to record the reasons, stating the relevant circumstances on the basis of which he forms such opinion. He also referred to the decisions of the hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v. Hotel Joshi reported in [2000] 242 ITR 478 and the decision of the hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case o....