TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1001
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rred in dismissing the appeal on technical ground instead of considering the merits of the case. ii. 2) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) has erred in confirming the revised long term capital gain at Rs. 37,89,450/- as on 06/12/2006 and at Rs. 1,54,350/- as on 01/04/1981 as against the valuation at Rs. 25,62,140/- and at Rs. 3,21,024/- as on 01/04/1981 as submitted by the appellant. iii. 3) It is therefore, prayed that the base of computation of long term capital gain as submitted by the appellant vide letter dated 06/04/2011 at Rs. 3,21,024/- as on 01/04/1981 and at Rs. 25,62,140/- as on 06/12/2006 (date of sale of flat) be ordered to be accepted. 2. The assessee has also filed a petition for admi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter managed to file appeal on 04/05/2018. Therefore, he submitted that the delay in filing in appeal is not intentional but due to the circumstances and also ill health of the assessee. Accordingly, the delay in appeal may be condoned. 4. The Ld. DR on the other hand, opposed condonation of delay in filing appeal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that due to ill health, the assessee could not file appeal in time, therefore, we are of the considered view that there is reasonable cause for not filing appeal within the time prescribed under the Act and hence the delay in filing of appeal has been condoned and the appeal has been admitted for hearing. 6. The brief, facts of the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order in respect of determination of full value of consideration. In response, the assessee vide letter dated 08/08/2011, submitted a copy of valuation report obtained from an independent valuer and requested to adopt the said value for the purpose of Long Term Capital Gain. The AO after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taken in to account valuation report, completed assessment by adopting fair market value as determined by the DVO as on 01/04/1981 and 06/12/2006 and computed LTCG at Rs. 29,86,298/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed elaborate written submissions on 28/11/2014. The assessee has challenged the orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llegal and void ab-initio. The Ld. CIT(A), without appreciating the facts has simply dismissed the appeal on the ground that the issue on the merit have already been considered by then the Ld. CIT(A) and hence in view of doctrine of merger the present appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) is also merged with the quantum appeal but facts remains that in order to invoke provisions of section 154 of the Act, there must be prima facie mistake in the order of the AO, but in this case, the AO want to rectify the assessment order by replacing DVO valuation of the property as against stamp duty authority which cannot be considered as mistake apparent from record. 9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eplacing value determined by the DVO. The provisions of section 154 makes it clear that in order rectify any order u/s 154 of the Act, there should be a prima-facie mistake apparent from record. If the issue is debatable which can be decided on prolonged discussions or deliberations, the same cannot be subject matter of 154 proceedings. In this case, the issue of full value of consideration is a subject matter of deliberations and which can be decided by prolonged discussions and a view can be taken, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) came to the conclusion that there is prima facie merit in the arguments of the assessee insofar as subject matter of 154 proceedings, but he went on to decide the issue on technical grounds by applying the principle of....