ITO, WARD 16(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DIVYESH RAMNIKLAL MUNI, MUMBAI

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in rejecting the value of Rs. 27,193/- per sq. ft. taken by the Assessing Officer using the ready reckoner rates and by not referring back to the AO for verification by way of calling for a report from the Valuation Officer. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing the deduction u/s. 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though the conditions of section 54 were not fulfilled. 4. The department craves leave to add/delete/amend the grounds of appeal. 2. The Ld. CIT (A)'s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT (A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the AO restored. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary at the time of hearing The Appellate Order of NFAC, Delhi vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073529583 (1) dated 20.02.2025 in the case of Divyesh Ramniklal Muni for A.Y. 2016-17, has been received in the O/o. Pr. CIT-8, Mumbai through ITBA on 20.02.2025. The Last date for filing appeal is 30.04.2025. However, appeal should be filed immediately.” Brief facts of the case are as under: 2. The assessee is Charted Accountant by profession and during the year under consideration, he derived income from house property, income from business & profession, income from capital gains and income from other sources. The assessee filed its return of income on 17/10/2016, declaring total income of Rs.9,25,610/-. The return was processed u/s.143(1) and subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny. 2.1 Subsequently, statutory notices u/s. 143(2) was issued to the assessee along with notice u/s.142(1). In response to the statutory notices, the assessee furnished various details as called

5 In response to the statutory notices the assessee vide letter dated 10/12/2018 submitted that, capital gains arose in the hands of the assessee during the year under consideration on account of exchange of existing residential flat to receive newly constructed flat from the developer. The assessee submitted that, vide development agreement entered into by society dated 31/10/2015, the old flats of the assessee were entitled to be exchanged with new constructed flat of identical area along with monetary compensation of hardship and cost incurred by the member was agreed to be payable. 2.6 The developer also provided for an option to acquire more area than the entitled area of the type of flat owned by each member on payment of an agreed sum of Rs.22,000/- per sq. ft. The assessee submitted that, he opted for the area of 205 sq. ft. for each of the flat. The assessee submitted that payment of the cost for the additional area was recovered by the developer from payment of the said monetary compensation. In lieu of which, a confirmation was issued by the developer for payment of hard ship compensation in the course of redevelopment and the flat of recovery all for the cost for the additional area from the compensation was recovered from the hardship compensation payable by the developer. The said confirmation is placed on record. 2.7 On considering the submissions filed by the assessee, the Ld.AO considered investment in the additional area of 205 sq.ft. by assessee as forming part of the consideration. As assessee submitted that, he was entitled for flat at 1381 sq.ft. as per