2015 (6) TMI 426

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....UDGMENT S. J. Vazifdar, Acting Chief Justice (Oral): 1. This is an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar (for short, the 'Tribunal') dated 27.03.2014 (Annexure A-7), upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, the 'CIT'), which in turn, computed the balance of the long term capital gains in respect of the la....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the land sold by the appellant, which was sold in a different year? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO was justified in applying the same sale price to the land sold by the appellant vis-a-vis land sold by Shri Surjit Singh though the lands were sold by the appellant one year before the sale of land by Shri Surjit Singh? 3. Whether on the facts and circumst....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....htly made as the proceedings under Sections 147 & 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the 'Act') cannot be faulted. There were sufficient grounds for the authorities to believe that income had escaped assessment on account of the appellant's failure to point out all the relevant facts. 5. Prima facie, it does appear that the rate of about Rs. 5000/-, as mentioned in the docu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....19,837/- per marla. 6. The questions of law are, therefore, answered in favour of the assessee/appellant, only for this limited reason, namely, the authorities ought to have made an effort to ascertain the price rather than merely relying upon the rate at which the lands were sold in the subsequent year. 7. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned order dated 27.03.2014 (Annexure A-....