2015 (7) TMI 977

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nst order dated 25th March 2013 in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2009-10, the Assessing Officer has raised a grievance against the learned CIT(A) adopting the fair market value of the land, as on 1.4.81, sold by the assessee at Rs. 85 per square yard. The Assessing Officer's stand is that this value should have been taken at Rs. 70 per square yard, as was taken by him in the assessment order. In the related cross objection no 17/Del/14 filed by the assessee, the assessee is also aggrieved of the stand so taken by the CIT(A) but his grievance is that the value should have been taken at Rs. 110 per square yard. The assessee is also aggrieved of the cost of improvement of Rs.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....quare yard, he adopted the FMV at Rs. 85 and decline to take the solatium into account for the computation for this purpose. He upheld the action of the AO in declining to take into account the cost of improvement for want of evidence. None of the parties is satisfied. The AO is aggrieved of the CIT(A) adopting Rs. 85 as FMV as on 1.4.81, as against Rs. 70 adopted by him, and the assessee is aggrieved of the solatium not being taken into account for the purpose of computing FMV as on 1.4.81. The assessee is also aggrieved of the cost of improvement being declined in computation of capital gains. 4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable lega....