TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 127
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd as per sale-deeds at a low price aggregated at Rs.18.66 per sq.ft whereas rate was atleast Rs.40 per sq.ft. and thus he added Rs.17,14,418 in assessee's income on this count. Further, he disallowed depreciation of Rs.5,86,344 on three tankers on the ground that these tankers were not given on lease and they were not put in use for that assessment year. On appeal, CIT (A) vide his order dated 15.09.2000 partly accepted appeal of the assessee, and assumed that land was sold at the rate of Rs.22 per sq.ft. instead of Rs.20 and thus deleted Rs.14,99,345 as income from sale proceeds of land and further allowed full depreciation on tankers as claimed by the assessee. Assessee as well as revenue filed appeals against the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dismissed. So far as question No.1 is concerned, Assessee sold his plots at an average rate of Rs.18.66 per sq.ft. The Assessing Officer mainly relied on the statement of Shri S.L. Dak and the rates taken by the Sub Registrar, and adopted value of the plots at Rs.40 per sq.ft. Learned ITAT has mentioned in its order that one of the purchasers of two plots, viz. Shri B.S. Bomb, was also examined by Assessing Officer, who had purchased two plots worth Rs.36,000 each, and on same consideration sale-deeds were registered. Assessing Officer has not discussed the statement of Mr. Bomb. Apparently, there was no other reliable material on record before the Assessing Authority to assume sale of plots at Rs.40 per sq.ft. Learned counsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....han the one mentioned in the sale deed did pass from the assessee to the seller is a pure question of fact and the department having failed to show that any relevant material has been ignored or misread by the CIT(A) or the Tribunal while deleting the addition made by AO, such questions, in any case, are required to be answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. In other case reported in (2008) 3 DTR 142 (CIT Vs. Kishan Kumar & Ors.), it was held that while computing undisclosed income under Sec.158BB, the rates of property fixed by Stamp Valuation Authority for the purposes of registration of sale deeds, cannot be taken to be the price for which the property was purchased. Aforesaid citations make it clear that in absence....