TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 1538
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shown at Rs. 58,03,606/-. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax further noticed that the average rate of land measuring 31.1 kanals was adopted by the assessee at Rs. 37,090/- per kanal, whereas the assessee had purchased the above land measuring 28.2 kanals on 4.2.1979 at a consideration of Rs. 1,27,050/- including stamp duty expenses and further purchased land measuring 2.19 kanals on 12.8.1981 for consideration of Rs. 22,500/- including expenses on stamp duty which comes to Rs. 10,274/- per kanal. In view of purchase of land per kanal as on 12.8.1981 @ Rs. 10,274/-, the rate for indexation of land as on 1.4.1981 was required to be adopted at Rs. 10,274/- per kanal as against Rs. 37,090/- per kanal taken by the assessee and accepted by the Assessing Officer for the purpose of calculation of capital gain/loss. On this basis, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax was of the view that there was a Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 41,43,959/-, which was required to be assessed by the Assessing Officer as against Long Term Capital Loss of Rs. 1,83,059/- accepted while completing the assessment proceedings. In view of this, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax held that there was appa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nds of appeal: "1. That the orders of the Ld. CIT u/s. 263 is illegal, erroneous, perverse and thus uncalled for. 2. That the Ld. CIT is not justified in invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is void ab-initio and thereby holding the orders under scrutiny passed by the A.O. u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after perusing for complete details as even filed alongwith the Income Tax Return and after due application of mind and perusing the concerned provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That the Ld. CIT is not justified in setting aside the order passed u/s. 143(3) while remanding the matter to A.O., for reconsideration without allowing inspection of the Assessment Record to the appellant which is against the principles of natural justice and of law. 4. That without prejudice to above grounds of appeal the appellant disputes the very initiation of the proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as bad in law and thereby setting aside a well versed orders of the A.O. to be decided afresh. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the present appeal." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the sale of said property was raised by the Assessing Officer. This notice was duly replied by the assessee as on 19.2.2010. The copy of the same is placed at page 44 of the Paper Book. On 19.2.2010, notice under section 154 of the Act was issued to the assessee, copy of which is placed at page 45 and 45-A of the Paper Book, whereby specific query regarding the transaction of said property was made. The reply to the said notice was made by the assessee as on 29.7.2010, the copy of which is placed at page 46 of the Paper Book. It was stated at the Bar that these proceedings initiated by the notice under section 154 of the Act has been dropped since no order has been passed till date. All these documents were shown to us to emphasize the fact that the Assessing Officer was seized of the whole transaction taken by the assessee. He had specifically asked the assessee for explanation of the same, which was duly replied. The Assessing Officer has applied his mind in taking a view. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax cannot assume jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act on difference of opinion. 8. The learned D.R relied upon the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ings of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax in 263 proceedings and also the arguments of the learned D.R. during the course of hearing that there was some mistake in the Valuation Report of Registered Valuer, which the assessee enclosed with the return of income, also does not advance the case of the Department. It is a case in which on the basis of evidences filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer forms an opinion and then makes the assessment. There is nothing illegal in this. There is no law which says that the Valuation Report has to be drawn in a certain specific fashion. The valuation is an art and any Valuation Officer who is registered by the Government to make such kind of valuation can make his own basis for valuing the property. In the present case, the Valuation has been done by a Registered Valuer, which the Assessing Officer has perused and formed an opinion. No specific procedure has been prescribed under the Statute as to how the Assessing Officer has to react in such situation. 11. An order can be revised under section 263 of the Act by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax only if it satisfies the twin conditions of being erroneous as well as prejudicial....