ITO 16(1)-3,Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road,Mumbai. Vs. Savita Hemrajani, 203A, Sky Scraper,74, Warden Road, Mumbai-400 006
September, 19th 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAI BENCH `J' BENCH
BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND
SHRI RAJENDRA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
Assessment Year: 2005-06
ITO 16(1)-3, Savita Hemrajani,
Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, 203A, Sky Scraper, 74, Warden Road,
Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006
PA No.AAXPH 8364 H
Appellant by : Rajarshi Dwivedi
Respondent by: Jayesh Dadia
Date of hearing: 6 .9.2012
Date of pronouncement: 14.9.2012
Per B.R.Mittal, JM:
The department has filed this appeal for assessment year 2005-06 against order
dated 29.1.2010 of ld CIT(A) -27, Mumbai.
2. The only issue involved in this appeal is as to whether ld CIT(A) is justified to
direct the AO to take the value of land as on 1.4.1981 as per the valuation report filed
by the assessee at the time of assessment proceedings though at the time of filing
return of income, assessee estimated the value at Rs.50,000 whereas the value
determined by the approved valuer as on 1.4.1981 was at Rs.9,24,700 as fair market
value because the said property was acquired in April, 1971.
3. We have perused orders of authorities below and have heard representatives of
parties. At the time of hearing, ld D.R. relied on order of AO and whereas ld A.R.
submitted that on identical facts, the issue is covered in favour of assessee by the
decision dated 30.11.2010 of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Mrs Gopi S Shivnani vs ITO,
133 ITD 172(Mumbai), wherein, it was held that the Act permits the assessee to adopt
the fair market value as on 1.4.1981 or the actual if it was acquired prior to 1.4.1981.
2 ITA No.2864/Mum/2010
Assessment Year: 2005-06
Since the assessee chose to file the valuation report taking the value as on 1.4.1981
during the course of assessment proceedings when the AO chose to modify the sale
value as per section 50C, the assessee was well within her rights to choose the value as
per the provisions of the Act. We agree with ld A.R. that case of the assessee is
squarely covered by the decision of ITAT in the case of Mrs Gopi S Shivnani (supra).
Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld CIT(A) and the same is upheld by
rejecting the ground of appeal taken by department.
4. In the result, appeal filed by revenue is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on 14TH September, 2012
(RAJENDRA) (B.R. MITTAL)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Mumbai, Dated 14th September, 2012
1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),27, Mumbai
4. Commissioner of Income Tax, City XVI , Mumbai
5. Departmental Representative, Bench `J' Mumbai
//TRUE COPY// BY ORDER
ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI