2015 (3) TMI 406

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was right in directing the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to Rs. 8 Lakhs as offered by the assessee? 2) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the CPWD rates cannot be applied to the commercial-cum-residential complex constructed at Coimbatore on the ground that Coimbatore is a small town?" 3. The short facts, in a nutshell, are as hereunder :- The assessee constructed a shopping-cum-residential complex and returned the cost of construction at Rs. 96,22,000/-, whereas the Assessing Officer, while completing the reassessment, arrived at the cost of construction based on the DVO report at Rs. 1,34,04,992/-. The difference of Rs. 37,82,992/- was made as an addition. The s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Income Tax  Vs  Raya R.Govindarajan (T.C.A. No.255 of 2014 dated 22.7.2014). In the said case, this Court held as hereunder :- "12. In the case of T.M.P.N.Murugesan  Vs - Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 217 Taxmann 40, this Court, while considering the similar issue whether the rates fixed by the CPWD alone could be taken into consideration towards arriving at a cost of construction, held as follows: "7. It is seen from the narration of the facts that evidently, except for the bare accounts maintained, there are no materials in the form of vouchers, to cross check the quantum of materials used in the construction. In the absence of basic records with regard to the extent of materials, the materials purchased ....