TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 734
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that there is no uniform application of CPWD rates in different places of the country. As seen form the valuation report it is clearly mentioned that the plinth area rates are based on the cost of completed buildings at a particular time and a cost index is applied to determine the cost of construction at that place. The specifications and the cost index for which the Govt. of India plinth area rates are applicable have been clearly indicative, which makes the plinth area rates more flexible for using the same for all constructions in different places with different cost indices and for constructions with different specifications, by accounting for the deviations and making necessary adjustments in the rates. 3. The CIT(A) erred in adop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... just before 11 days, whereas the assessment order was made on 29.1.2009. He further mentioned that the objections filed before the assessing officer were also not considered meaningfully, which is evident from the order of the assessing officer. The assessee also submitted that there is necessity for redeciding the cost of determined by the DVO in the light of the decision of the ITAT in the case of Salma Mehdi dated,26.6.1994 in ITA No.697-698/Hyd./93 for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87, i.e. reduction at the rate of 10% towards self supervision and 15% towards rate difference between the CPWD rate and the local rates. The CIT(A) considered the above submission and upheld the existence of rate difference between the CPWD rates....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....us, the Learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue relied heavily on the argumentative grounds raised before us. To sum up, the Revenue is aggrieved by the grant of deduction on account of rate difference and also on account of self supervision. The learned Departmental Representative further mentioned another decision of the Tribunal in the case of Smt.Bhagyalakshmi V/s. ACIT in ITA No.280/Hyd/2008 dated 7.8.2009, for assessment year 2003-04, wherein the Tribunal granted deduction at the rate of 7.5% towards self supervision. In this regard, the Learned Departmental Representative filed a copy of the said decision in the case of Bhagyalakshmi (supra) and read out the facts of the said case and mentioned that granting deduction of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shwari ( 7 ITR (Trib) 645) is relevant for the proposition. 9. On hearing the learned Departmental Representative for revenue and on perusing the orders of the Revenue authorities and the decisions cited before us, we find that the appeal can be adjudicated in the absence of the assessee or his counsel. The issues for adjudication relates to the grant of deductions (a) on account of difference in rate between the CPWD rates and the rates existing in Khothagudem and Khammam; and (2) deduction towards self supervision. We shall take up the issue relating to the rate difference. With regard to this issue, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bhagyalakshmi (supra) is not relevant here, as there is no dispute in the present case with r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(supra). We have perused the facts of both the cases in the light of the facts of the case of the assessee in the instant case, wherein the hotel building of the assessee comprising of six stories(including lower ground), was constructed under the self supervision of all the partners of the firm located at Kothagudem/Khammam. Considering the size of the town and the asset under consideration, we are of the opinion that the assessee was in an advantageous position to bargain the rates to the maximum benefit of the assessee, in which case, higher deduction is justified. Further, we have perused the decision of the Jaipur Bench decision in the case of Nitish Maheshwri & Manish Maheshwari (supra), where construction of house was subject matt....