CIT v. Puja Prints

360 ITR 697High Court2014#1290 most cited

What is CIT v. Puja Prints authority for?

The amendment to Section 55A(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which replaced "is less than" with "is at variance" as the condition for referring a valuation to a Departmental Valuation Officer, does not have retrospective effect. Consequently, for periods before July 1, 2012, a DVO reference is invalid if the declared value is not "less than" the fair market value.

88

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Puja Prints · 360 ITR 697 · Section 55A · retrospective amendment · "is less than" fair market value · "is at variance" fair market value · DVO reference · cost of acquisition · 01.04.1981 valuation · fair market value determination

Also reported as

224 Taxmann 22

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 55A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

fair market value

Judgments citing CIT v. Puja Prints

Vijaykumar Gamanlal Modi, HUF, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 545/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Viresh I. Rudalal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Jigneshkumar S. Modi (HUF) Vs. ITO, Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Palsana, Ward 1, Dist. Surat-394327, Gujarat Bardoli PAN/GIR No.: AAFHJ9730D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Vijaykumar Gamanlal Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Ward 1, Palsana, Dist. Surat-394327, Bardoli Gujarat PAN/GIR No.: AAHHV4108F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Gamandbhai Nanubhai Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi…

Jigneshkumar S. Modi HUF, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 544/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Viresh I. Rudalal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Jigneshkumar S. Modi (HUF) Vs. ITO, Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Palsana, Ward 1, Dist. Surat-394327, Gujarat Bardoli PAN/GIR No.: AAFHJ9730D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Vijaykumar Gamanlal Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Ward 1, Palsana, Dist. Surat-394327, Bardoli Gujarat PAN/GIR No.: AAHHV4108F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Gamandbhai Nanubhai Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi…

Nitin Kumar Gamanlal Modi HUF, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 551/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Viresh I. Rudalal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Jigneshkumar S. Modi (HUF) Vs. ITO, Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Palsana, Ward 1, Dist. Surat-394327, Gujarat Bardoli PAN/GIR No.: AAFHJ9730D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Vijaykumar Gamanlal Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Ward 1, Palsana, Dist. Surat-394327, Bardoli Gujarat PAN/GIR No.: AAHHV4108F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Gamandbhai Nanubhai Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi…

Sanmukhlal Nanubhai Modi HUF, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 550/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Viresh I. Rudalal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Jigneshkumar S. Modi (HUF) Vs. ITO, Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Palsana, Ward 1, Dist. Surat-394327, Gujarat Bardoli PAN/GIR No.: AAFHJ9730D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Vijaykumar Gamanlal Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi Faliya, Kadodara, Tal. Ward 1, Palsana, Dist. Surat-394327, Bardoli Gujarat PAN/GIR No.: AAHHV4108F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Gamandbhai Nanubhai Modi Vs. ITO, (HUF) Modi…

Bhima Dada Kharate, Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1598/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 54BSection 55A

…peal. Ground No.1 and 2 refers to the scope of Section 55A of the Act regarding reference to DVO in case of cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981. The Ld. AR submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Pooja Prints, reported as 360 ITR 697 (Bom.) has held that such reference cannot be made prior to the amendment to Section 55A of the Act. In para 8 of the said order Hon'ble Court specified that law to be applied for Section 55A shall be as existing during the relevant assessment year. The copy of the said judgment is enclosed at page 1 to 3 of the legal compilation submitted bef…

Balu Vitthal Kharate, Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1596/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 54BSection 55A

…peal. Ground No.1 and 2 refers to the scope of Section 55A of the Act regarding reference to DVO in case of cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981. The Ld. AR submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Pooja Prints, reported as 360 ITR 697 (Bom.) has held that such reference cannot be made prior to the amendment to Section 55A of the Act. In para 8 of the said order Hon'ble Court specified that law to be applied for Section 55A shall be as existing during the relevant assessment year. The copy of the said judgment is enclosed at page 1 to 3 of the legal compilation submitted bef…

Late Manishbhai Nagindas Gajjar, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for in ITA

ITA 1335/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1335/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2011-12 Late Manishbhai Nagindas Gajjar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Through L/H Illaben Manishbhai Ward- 6(3) Surat Gajjar, 316Kh Luhar Mohhallo , Palgam, Chaurasi Surat 359009 Pan: Aovpg 1860K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 55A

…g-term capital gain at Rs.59,48,005/- [Rs.61,34,998 – Rs.1,86,993)and made addition accordingly. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT (A). Wherein on the basis of strength of decision in the case of CIT-13 v. Puja Prints [2014] 360 ITR 697 (Bombay)/ 43 taxmann.com 247(Bombay) and ITO v. Smt. Lalitaben B. Kapadia [2008] 115 TTJ(Mum) 938 and others as mentioned in appellate order, it was contended that the reference to DVO is not valid where the fair market value as on 01.04.1981 is higher than in the opinion of the AO. However, Ld. CIT (A) held that the reference was made on 17.01.2…

Sanjay Kailaschand Bhartiya, Jalna vs. Income -Tax Officer, Jalna

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1425/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1424/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Rajendra Kanhiyalal Bhartiya, Kerosene Dealer, Naya Bazar, Shola Chowk, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalna – 431203 …. Pan: Amspb4560E Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 1, Jalna आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1425/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Kailashchand Bhartiya, Prop. Of Dainik Krushnaniti, Naya Bazar, Shola Chowk, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalna – 431203 …. Pan: Afnpb3190E Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-1, Jalna

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 54F

…fair market value as on 01.04.1981 and whether the same can be adopted at value lesser than the value declared by the assessee, while computing Income from Capital Gains, has been deliberated upon by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Puja Prints (2014) 360 ITR 697 (Bom) and it has been held as under:- “6 . We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the impugned order dated 18 February, 2011 allowing the respondent assessee's appeal holding that no reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer can be made under Section 55A of the Act, only follows the decision of this Court in the matter of Da…

Rajendra Kanhiyalal Bhartiya, Jalna vs. Income -Tax Officer, Jalna

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1424/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1424/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Rajendra Kanhiyalal Bhartiya, Kerosene Dealer, Naya Bazar, Shola Chowk, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalna – 431203 …. Pan: Amspb4560E Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 1, Jalna आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1425/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Kailashchand Bhartiya, Prop. Of Dainik Krushnaniti, Naya Bazar, Shola Chowk, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalna – 431203 …. Pan: Afnpb3190E Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-1, Jalna

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 54F

…fair market value as on 01.04.1981 and whether the same can be adopted at value lesser than the value declared by the assessee, while computing Income from Capital Gains, has been deliberated upon by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Puja Prints (2014) 360 ITR 697 (Bom) and it has been held as under:- “6 . We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the impugned order dated 18 February, 2011 allowing the respondent assessee's appeal holding that no reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer can be made under Section 55A of the Act, only follows the decision of this Court in the matter of Da…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Nashik vs. Sagar Suresh Somwanshi, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1375/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi
Section 143(2)Section 55A

…der dated 27-03-2015, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the addition by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Puja Prints 360 ITR 697. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the Assessing Officer had no power to refer valuation of properties to DVO where the value declared by the assessee is more than the fair market value. Against the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Shri Ajay Modi representing the…

Ram Prakash & Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1030/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiram Prakash & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito 4/17-B, Mgf House, Ward 15(2), Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi. Central Revenue Bldg., Pan No. Aaacr0078A New Delhi. Appellant Respondent Appellant/Assessee By Sh.Ajay Wadhwa, Ca Ms. Rashi, Ca Respondent/Revenue By Sh. Atiq Ahmad, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 20.06.2018 Order Per Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

Section 143(3)Section 50Section 55A

…Valuation Cell to determine the fair market value of the assets as on 1.4.1981 for computation of capital gain. The issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Puja Prints reported in 360 ITR 697, wherein it has been held that a reference can be made to the Valuation Cell u/s 55A of the Act only if the value determined by the assessee is less than the fair market value. In the present case the value declared by assessee as on 1.4.1981 is more than the fair market value determined by the Valuation Cell. The Hon’ble High Court is dealt wit…

Late Smt. Giriraj Kaur L/H Sri Ravinder Gill, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 931/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishilate Smt. Giriraj Kaur, Vs. Ito, C/O. L/H Sri Ravinder Gill, Ward-1(2), 861, Mangal Bhawan, Muzaffarnagar Bhopa Road, Muzaffarnagar Pan: Dtppk0005J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt Prem Lata Bansal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT Dr
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 55A

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Late Smt. Giriraj Kaur, Vs. ITO, C/o. L/H Sri Ravinder Gill, Ward-1(2), 861, Mangal Bhawan, Muzaffarnagar Bhopa Road, Muzaffarnagar PAN: DTPPK0005J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Smt Prem Lata Bansal, Sr. Adv Shri Ram Avatar Bansal, Adv Shri Ydhvir Dalal, Adv Revenue by: Shri Sanjit Singh, CIT Dr Date of Hearing 26/03/2018 Date of pronouncement 18/06/2018 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ord…

Anil Maruti Shitole, Pune vs. ` Income Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 75/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Deepak SasarFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 54BSection 55A

…to DVO u/s.55A of the Act. Ld. Counsel submitted that this issue should be remanded to the file of AO for deciding the issue afresh after considering the facts as well as the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Puja Prints 360 ITR 697. The same is relevant for the legal proposition that the referral u/s.55A of the Act to the DVO should be made only when the value adopted by the assessee was less than that of the fair market value. 4. After considering the binding judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Puja Prints (supra), the issue raised by the asses…

Laxman Maruti Shitole, Pune vs. ` Income Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 74/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Deepak SasarFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 54BSection 55A

…to DVO u/s.55A of the Act. Ld. Counsel submitted that this issue should be remanded to the file of AO for deciding the issue afresh after considering the facts as well as the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Puja Prints 360 ITR 697. The same is relevant for the legal proposition that the referral u/s.55A of the Act to the DVO should be made only when the value adopted by the assessee was less than that of the fair market value. 4. After considering the binding judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Puja Prints (supra), the issue raised by the asses…

ITO, WD-30(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Tolaram and Sons (HUF), Karnataka

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is party allowed

ITA 974/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 974/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ito, Ward-30(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Tolaram & Sons (Huf) [Pan: Aaaht 7363 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R.P.Nag, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 55A

…f the Act. In the instant case, since Section 55A(a) was applicable the Ld. AO ought not to have invoked Section 55A(b)(ii) of the Act. The assessee placed reliance in this regard on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Puja Prints reported in 360 ITR 697 (Bomb). The assessee also pleaded that there is absolutely no finding recorded by the Ld. AO in the year that the value so claimed by the assessee (i.e. cost of acquisition) is less than the fair market value. Without recording such finding and also recording a finding that 55A(a) of the Act is not applicable, the action of the Ld. AO in directly…

Maruti G.Thopte, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Aggarwal
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 253Section 54FSection 55A

…ee be allowed holding reference to DVO was not valid. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the assessee in those appeals relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Puja Prints reported as (2014) 360 ITR 697 (Mum). The Ld. CIT(A) in those appeals accepted the plea of the assessee made after reliance upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court judgment (supra). In view of the identical facts and circumstances in those appeals the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not following the Hon'ble Bombay High Court judgment (supra) which is in favour of the assessee. The…

Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5097/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivram a/sFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.5097/Mum./2015 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia Through L/h Shri Mahesh G. Garodia 149/156, Garodia Shipping Centre ……………. Appellant Garodia Nagar, Ghatkopar (E) Mumbai 400 077 PAN – AACPG2914R v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–22(1), Mumbai ITA no.5113/Mum./2015 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–27(1), Mumbai v/s Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia Through L/h Shri Ma…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 767/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Manish V. Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vidusha Kalra
Section 10Section 14A

…land and the administrative block on such land. Therefore, there are no circumstances warranting for reference u/s 55A(b)(ii) of the Act. Ld. Counsel placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Puja Prints [360 ITR 697] and submits that when the value of the asset claimed by the assessee is more than the fair market value arrived by the DVO, the reference made u/s 55A(b)(ii) of the Act to find out the fair market value is bad in law. 14. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. The only reason given by Assessing Officer…

Nirmala Ravikant Wayale, Kalyan vs. ITO WD 3(4), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 300/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Nirmala Ravikant Wayale Income Tax Officer Ward- 103, Triveni Dhara. Wayale Nagar, 3(4), Kalyan Khadakpada, Kalyan (W), Vs. Pin-421301 Pan No. Aaopw3944K Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Suman Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 23-08-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 01-09-2017

Section 143(3)Section 55A

…is covered in favour of assessee in assessee’s own case for AY 2004-05 in ITA No. 4234/Mum/2015 vide order dated 09-01-2017, wherein Tribunal exactly identical issue was considered following Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Puja Prints (2014) 360 ITR 697 (Bom) and observed as under: - “6. We had carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal. Precise observation was as under: - 3. The common grievance of the assesses in all the appeals pertains to addition made by the AO by disregarding the valuation made by the assessee on the basis of government approved valuer’s report as on 1-4-1981. 4. R…

Allo N Davar, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 16(2)1, Mumbai

ITA 8377/MUM/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri P.B Chhapgar & N.A. Patade-ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-DR
Section 143Section 54

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ए” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मेमेमेमे खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“A”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./8377/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2001-02 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Late Mrs. Aloo N. Davar Income tax Officer (by her Legal Heir Mr. Fali N. Davar) Ward-16(2)(1), Matru Mandir H-1, Palacimo, 8th Floor Tardeo, Mumbai-400 007. Vs. Silver Oaks Estate, Bhulabhai Estat…