ASHOK KUMAR MALHOTRA,DHANBAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), DHANBAD

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy)

133(6) of the Act and claimed that he had incurred cost for improvement on the land for various years and computed the capital gain of ₹67,131/-. She submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has at para 4.4 onwards recorded that the land in Lapra village is 2.5 km from the jurisdiction of Khelari town which is the nearest

ITO.WD-2(1), RANCHI vs. SHRI NAND BIHARI SHRIVASTAVA, RANCHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

133/­. The assessee had sold two property for Rs. 70,00,000/­. The Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee and given relief of Rs. 69,96,455/­. The appeal is being filed against the relief allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). The grounds of appeals are as under:­ 1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income