TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 367
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....16. 2. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 313 days in filing of the present appeal. Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit has been filed by the assessee stating that the main reason for delay is on account of illness of the assessee suffering from various diseases. We note that the delay is not intentional and assessee has not gained from delaying the appeal. Taking a justice oriented approach and also placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others(1987) 167 ITR 471(SC) & in the case of Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382), we hereby condone the delay of 313 days and admit ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f necessity so arises. 4. Though the assessee has raised six grounds of appeal but the main grievance is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 77,00,000/- made by the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) invoking provision of section 50C of the Act. 5. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee sold two plots of land situated at Solapur Municipal Corporation limits for the land sold to M/s. Swapnil Associates, Ld. AO has not made any addition u/s. 50C of the Act. However for the land sold to Shri Amit A. Sindagi and others, the sale consideration shown in the sale agreement is Rs. 37,50,000/- but the Stamp Valuation authorities have calculated the stamp duty valued at Rs. 1,14,50,000/- There is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted) the main road. The sale transaction of this land sale instance was in dispute at a later stage due to non-payment by the buyer of the property, this fact is clearly stated in the assessment order as well in the valuation report of the DVO. This sale instance is not independent, biased and not a right representative of the nature of land sold by assessee. Considering this, this Instance for ascertaining the value of land is not a valid instance which renders the entire valuation exercise futile in this case. 2.4 Another instance used by DVO in the valuation report is having the land rate per sqm is Rs. 287. In the valuation report the rate taken by DVO is Rs. 344 per sq. mtr. without any basis, reason and explanation of the sam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been referenced by Ld. Counsel for the assessee extracted supra. We note that for the valuation of immovable property No. 2, the assessee raised objection before the Ld. AO regarding the valuation made by the stamp duty authorities and Ld. AO has referred the matter to DVO, however prior to receiving of the DVO report assessment order has been framed and also the assessee did not get any opportunity to plead before the DVO prior to the furnishing of valuation report. We note that the facts narrated by assessee about the land location includes no free access, not suitable for residential purposes and also the discrepancies referred in the DVO report in which the instances used by DVO for another land is rate per square meter is Rs. 287/- but....