2021 (9) TMI 594

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....43(3), is bad in law and bad on facts. The order made u/s. 143(3) cannot be said to erroneous or prejudicial to interest of revenue. 2. The order passed u/s. 143(3), was made after duly examining the issue relating to capital gains and the said order cannot be said to be erroneous or prejudicial to the interest or revenue. The allocation of value of sale of land was on the basis of valuation adopted by the stamp authorities and was also verifiable. The ld. Pr. CIT had erred in observing that the appellant had taken the higher value of agriculture land. 3. The appellant crave liberty to add, amend, alter, or modify any of the ground of appeal on or before its hearing before your honour." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r making proper enquiries. 5. The contention of the assessee is that the land in question is situated amongst the agriculture land and the entire area is agriculture and there are hardly any industries in the said area. Out of the agriculture land owned by the assessee company, a portion of land was converted into industrial land. It was further contended that the value of the factory building, boundary wall, tine shed, industrial land and agriculture land was adopted on the basis of rates prescribed rates by the government. The details of such rates was also submitted during the assessment and was also submitted during the proceedings u/s. 263. The assessee submitted the working of such allocation as under: a. Industrial Land 8906.32 sq.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... placed reliance on the decision of Malabar Industrial Co Ltd. v. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC) that unless twin conditions are satisfied the revision u/s. 263 was no permissible. The assessee also referred to the decision in the case of CIT V/s. Girdhari Lal (2002) 176 CTR (Raj) 92 that if the AO has considered all relevant material on record, and such decision is one possible view, such order cannot be said to be erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The assessee also referred to various other judicial decisions also which were also considered. 8. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR has relied on the order of the ld. PCIT. 9. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Indisputably, the power o....