Itta/493/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Sri O.v.ramana Reddy
High Court
30 Jul 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/493/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Sri O.v.ramana Reddy
Date of order
30 Jul 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/493/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Sri O.v.ramana Reddy, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRAPRADESH
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
I.T.T.A. NO.493 OF 2014
DATED:30.7.2014
Between:
Commissioner of Income Tax-IIII.T. Towers, A.C. GuardsHyderabad … Appellant
And
O.V. Ramana Reddy (HUF) … Respondent
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
I.T.T.A. NO.493 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This appeal is sought to be preferred and admitted on thefollowing suggested questions of law, against the impugned judgmentof the learned Tribunal dated 25.10.2013 in relation to assessmentyear 2008-2009.
i.In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether theHon’ble Tribunal is correct in law in upholding the ratesadopted by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax[Appeals] to determine the capital gains, when the AssessingOfficer computed the capital gains adopting the fair marketvalue obtained from the Sub-Registrar Office for determiningthe cost of acquisition?
ii.In the facts and in the circumstances of the case whetherthe order of the Hon’ble ITAT is arbitrary and perverse andhence liable to be set aside?
The learned Tribunal upon consideration of the materialreached the valuation of the property. By doing so, the Tribunalobserved as follows:
“Therefore, considering the fact that the assessee’s propertyis situated at a prime location in Banjara Hills, which is just half akilometer away from Masab Tank, the Fair Market Value adopted bythe CIT(A) at Rs.900 per sq. yard for the land and Rs.100 per sq. ftfor the built up area appears to be reasonable and cannot be calledinto question.”
Since the decision arrived at was based not on unacceptable
material, we do not see any reason to interfere with the same.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as
to costs.
________________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
_______________________
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J
30.7.2014bnr
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.