Ita/1381/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Calicut v. Shri.k.a.bhaskaran,Calicut

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 ITA.No. 1381 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.299/COCH/2007 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT: ------------------------------ THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT: -------------------------- SHRI.K.A.BHASKARAN, KARUTHEDATH HOUSE, FLORICAN ROAD, MALAPARAMBA, CALICUT. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 1414 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 1381 & 1414 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Questions raised pertain to modification of income estimated bythe assessing officer, and reversed by the first appellate authority andconfirmed by the Tribunal and also granting of exemption underSection 54 of the I.T. Act in respect of capital gains received by theassessee on sale of landed property. So far as modifications andadditions are concerned, we are of the view that questions raised areonly pure questions of fact. So far as the challenge against granting ofexemption from capital gains is concerned, one issue raised is fixationof market value as on 1.4.1981 and the other is about exemptiongranted under Section 54 of the Act. Even though the document reliedon for fixing the market value, as rightly pointed out by standingcounsel, is not of the relevant year, still we feel the fixation of marketvalue is also a finding of fact involving estimation. So far as grantingof exemption from capital gains is concerned, the dispute raised by the department is that the construction of the new building commencedprior to the previous year. However, there is no dispute that the capitalgains received is invested in the new building constructed by theassessee. On the whole, we find questions raised are not substantialquestions of law. Consequently the appeals filed against the commonorders of the Tribunal are dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (V.K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk