BHARAT JALANDAR PATOLE,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), KOLHAPUR

Date of Hearing : 22.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 15.05.2024 ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1061124934(1), dated 19.02.2024, involving proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2 ITA.No.394/PUN./2024 backdrop the assessee’s instant appeal and pleadings herein make it evident that his registered valuer’s report had claimed cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 @ Rs.240/- per sq. feet as reduced by the DVO’s valuation report to Rs.15/- per sq. metre. It is indeed very much relevant to pinpoint here that the earlier legislative expression used in sec.55A(a) would be applicable in case the FMV “is less than it’s fair value” up to 01.07.2012 before the foregoing amendment. That being the case, this tribunal is of the considered view that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in going by the DVO’s report not having considered the earlier statutory provision in above terms. Case law Pooja Prints (2014) 360 ITR 697 (Bom.) has already settled the issue in assessee’s favour and against the department that the foregoing statutory amendment does not carry any retrospective effect. I accordingly accept the assessee’s foregoing sole substantive ground in very terms. Ordered accordingly.