Itxa/2556/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 11 v. N.k. Malpani Legal Heir And Husband Of Late Smt. C.n. Malpani

sas IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2556 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax-11, Mumbai ..Appellant. V/s. Dr. N.K. Malpani, legal heir & husbandof Late Smt. C.N. Malpani ..Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant. Mr. A.K. Jasani for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. DATED : 8TH MARCH, 2013 P.C. :- 1. In this appeal by the revenue for the assessment year 2006-07, following questions have been raised for our consideration:- (i)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the CIT(A), directing the AO to allow indexation from 1/4/1981 onwards to the assessee for the purpose of computation of the capital gain on transfer of three immovable properties ? (ii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the interpretation by the AO of explanation (iii) to Section 48 that the indexed cost of acquisition has to be computed with reference to the first year in which the asset was held by the assessee ?law, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the interpretation by the AO of explanation (iii) to Section 48 that the indexed cost of acquisition has to be computed with reference to the first year in which the asset was held by the assessee ? 2.Counsel for the parties agree that the issue arising in the present appeal is covered in favour of the respondent-assessee by the decision of this Court in the matter of CIT V/s. Manjula J. Shah reported in (2012) 249 CTR 270 (Bom). In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain the questions as proposed. 3.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)