TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nds: "1. The Ld. C. I. T. (Appeal)-II, Lucknow erred on facts and in law in estimating, fair market value of land as on 01.04.1981, at Rs.36/- per sq. ft. instead of Rs.50-00 per sq. ft. shown by the Appellant. 2. The Ld. C. I. T. (Appeals)-II, erred on facts and in law in not considering cost of improvement in building incurred in A. Y. 1988-89 and 1989-90 in Computation of Long Term Capital Gain, as shown by the Appellant." 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds in its appeal: "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.7,00,000/- on account of two cash deposits in the assessee's account with Indus Bank and ABN AMRO bank. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in adop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed a copy of the registered sale deed which was executed, on 12/03/1981, for the sale of land and building, situated at 13, Gokhle Marg, Lucknow, in which sale consideration of the land has been considered at Rs.60/- per sq. ft. The learned A. R. placed reliance on the decision reported in Dinesh Kumar Mittal Vs Income-tax Officer [1992] 193 ITR 770 (All) wherein the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has held as under: "That, in the instant case, the market value of the house for the purpose of stamp duty was shown as Rs.2,07,500/- but the actual consideration was stated to be Rs.1,50,000/-. The petitioner brought to the notice of the Commissioner that the portion purchased by him was under the tenancy of his mother and actually they were themse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... computation of long term capital gains. The AO is directed to compute the long term capital gain on the lines as decided above and consequently the appellant gets a partial relief on this issue." 6. The adoption of the rate by the Assessing Officer and subsequent reduction of the same by the CIT(A), cannot be sustained, in view of the relevant documentary evidence filed by the assessee in the form of report from the registered valuer and a comparable case. In this context, it is mentioned that the appellant assessee has filed a sale deed appearing at page No. 13 of the paper book, evidencing the contention of the assessee, as comparable case. In view of this, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned rate shown by the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idence. The submission made by the assessee is not plausible and in the absence of cogent and corroborative evidences, the same cannot be accepted. Needless to say that the onus to prove the incurring of expenditure, on renovation squarely lies on the assessee and the assessee has miserably failed, to prove the factum of incurring of the expenses. Accordingly, the finding of the CIT(A) are upheld and the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. As a result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 11. In ground No. 1, the Revenue contended that CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.7,00,000/-, on account of two cash deposits in the assessee‟s account with Indus Bank and ABN AMRO Bank. The learne....