MR.ANUJ MADHUKAR KUMAR, BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

O R D E R

Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member

2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under. “The impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-12, Bengaluru, dated 19-12-2017 is illegal, arbitrary and opposed to law and facts of the case. The learned officer has failed to understand that the controversy in the cases referred to by the learned officer relates to adoption of cost of construction-whether it is the actual cost of construction or the estimated cost of construction whereas the controversy in the case covered under relied upon by the appellant relates squarely to the adoption of deemed consideration-whether guidance value of the land ceded to the builders or the cost of construction of the built-up area. The learned officer has failed to note that the the ITAT has categorically stated in the case relied upon by the appellant as referred to above that the capital gains should be appropriate to the FMV of the land ceded and not to the cost of construction. The learned officer has failed to note that the Apex court has held in Page 2 of 3 the case of CIT v Vegetables Products Ltd (88 ITR 192) that if two reasonable constructions of a taxing provisions are possible, that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. The appellant therefore requests that in view of what is stated herein as also of what may be urged at the time of hearing, the order passed by the learned officer, impugned herein, may be quashed and set aside. The appellant craves leave to add to, delete, modify or amend any of thegrounds herein mentioned at the time of hearing”