TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 639
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n has arisen from the order passed by the ACIT, Junagadh Circle-1, Junagadh(in short "the AO") dated 27.03.2006 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of Income Tax Act,1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. Assessee raised the following ground of appeal : " 1.0 The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another: 2.0 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-IV, Rajkot [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] erred on facts as also in law in dismissing the appellant's ground of appeal relating as to validity of issue of notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Äct") and consequent assessment made by the AO. The notice u/s 148 of the Act and the assessment may kind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as erred in law and on facts in giving an opinion that the properties in Mumbai are sold on the basis of built up area and not on carpet area without any basis whatsoever. 3. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in assuming 25% as the increase in carpet area to arrive at the built up area without any basis. 4. On the facts of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 5. Any other ground that the revenue may raise before or during hearing proceedings before Hon'ble I.T.AT., the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is to be set aside on this point. 6. It is therefore, prayed that the order of the CIT(A) may be setaside and that of Assessing Officer be restored to the above exte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0 sq. ft. instead of Rs. 2200 per sq. ft of the carpet area of 1675 sq. ft. adopted by the assessee. The ld.Counsel submitted that the CIT(A) has directed the AO to adopt the rate of 1750 per sq.ft. in respect of built up area of 1675 sq.ft as against rate of 2200 per sq.ft. taken by the assessee. The ld.Counsel therefore placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiraben Jayantilal Shah vs. ITO 310 ITR 31 (Guj) submitted that the AO was incorrect in making reference to the DVO u/s. 55A of the Act as reference can be made u/s.55A only when the AO of the opinion that the fair market value of the asset claimed by the assessee is less than its FMV and not when he was of the opinion that the FMV of the propert....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee is in accordance with the estimate made by the registered value, is less than the FMV, in the opinion of the AO. The estimated value considered by the AO @1750 per sq.ft. is less than the FMV computed by the assessee by taking the rate of 2200. Therefore, in the light of decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiraban Jayantilal Shah vs. ITO (supra) and Jaya. Shah vs. ITO [2008] 6 DTR 203 (Guj) no reference can be made by the AO to the DVO. Further, the AO is not a technical person, as held by the various decision cited (supra) to compute fair market value his own. Therefore, he cannot determine the valuation of property, hence, in the light of these facts, we direct the AO to consider the rate at 2200 per sq.ft. for co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....within the meaning of section 54 of the Act. The ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had purchased a house boat at Srinagar for consideration for 10 lakhs from Mr.Abdul Khalil Wangnoo vide agreement for sale dated 28.03.1999. It was pointed out that as per Clause 6 & 11 of the sale deed, the assessee was having exclusive possession of the house boat and shall use the house boat as residential purpose and was full owner and use as per his own choice. The sale deed was duly attested by notary and the assessee has claimed deduction u/s.54 of the Act in respect of investment made towards purchase of house boat. However, the ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO by observing that in Srinagar house boats are ordinarily ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Per contra, the ld.Senior Departmental Representative submitted that the house boat is not a residential house within the meaning of section 54 of the Act. Further, as per Jammu & Kashmir Act, the person of other state cannot purchase an immovable property in the state of Jammu & Kashmir nor the assessee has entered into a registered sale deed, hence it cannot be said that the assessee has acquired a residential house as per provision of section 54 of the Act. In rejoinder, the ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted a Wikipedia in which a house boat is described as a accommodation for tourist in the area of Sri Nagar in Jammu & Kashmir(J & K), hence the house boat is a residential house for the purpose of deduction u/s.54 of the Act. The S....