2021 (1) TMI 684

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....its that while adjudicating the appeal filed by the assessee vide its order dated 27.12.2019, the Tribunal held that the asset is depreciable, hence agreed with the view of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short CIT(A)] ; however, the Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(A) in an appeal against an order of assessment, may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment and he has no power to set aside/restore the order to the file of the AO. It is thus argued by the Ld. DR that as both the CIT(A) and ITAT principally agreed with the view of the AO that invoking section 50C was right, the order dated 27.12.2019 passed by the Tribunal may be rectified u/s 254(2) of the Act. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel for the assessee ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ith section 55A of the Act : i. Where the assessee claims before the Assessing Officer that the value adopted or assessed of assessable by the stamp valuation authority exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer ; and ii. The value so adopted or assessed or assessable by stamp valuation authority has not been disputed, in any appeal or revision or reference before any authority or Court. It is held in S. Muthuraja v CIT (2013) 218 Taxman 73(Mag) (Mad) that where specific objection was made by assessee to Assessing Officer adopting market value of property u/s 50C(2), the Assessing Officer ought to have referred valuation of capital asset to valuation officer. 4.1 Further we have mentione....