- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Raj Kumar.
Factual and Procedural Background
The assessee and his brother purchased a leasehold plot at Ghaziabad and constructed a building. The assessee's estimated investment in the property was Rs. 2,86,836. The Department disagreed and made its own estimate of construction cost. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), after considering rival submissions, estimated the cost of construction at Rs. 3,00,000 and rejected the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s figure of about Rs. 5,00,000. The Department's application for reference before the ITAT was rejected. The Commissioner of Income-tax then moved the present application to the court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on the estimate of cost of construction raises a question of law warranting a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court examined the ITAT's order and found that the Tribunal had addressed relevant material factors in fixing the cost of construction: it applied U.P.P.W.D. rates rather than Central P.W.D. rates; it concluded that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not justified in treating the structure as a hybrid of R.C.C. and load-bearing construction; and it considered the valuer's report. On this appraisal of the materials on record, the court concluded that the ITAT's estimate was based on relevant considerations. Consequently, the court held that no question of law arose from the ITAT's order.
Holding and Implications
Application dismissed.
Direct effect: the Department's application under section 256(2) fails and is dismissed with costs assessed at Rs. 125. The opinion does not identify or establish any broader precedent beyond the disposition of this application.
Dr. R.R Misra, J.:— The assessee along with his brother had purchased a leasehold plot at Ghaziabad and constructed a building thereon. The estimated investment in this property, according to the assessee, was to the extent of Rs. 2,86,836. The Department did not agree with the same and made its own estimate of construction. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, however, on a consideration of the rival submissions, estimated the cost of construction at rupees three lakhs and disagreed with the figure of cost of construction of rupees five lakhs and odd as estimated by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Aggrieved, the Department filed an application for reference before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which was rejected. Consequently, the present application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act has been moved by the Commissioner of Income-tax.
2. We have heard learned standing counsel.
3. From a perusal of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, we find that, while fixing the cost of construction, it has taken into consideration various factors, viz., the rates to be applied for the estimate of cost of construction should be U.P.P.W.D rates and not the Central P.W.D rates and that, on the materials before it, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not justified at all in considering that the structure was a cross between R.C.C structure and load-bearing structure. Thereafter, the Tribunal has considered the report of the valuer. Thus, in our opinion, the cost of construction that has been arrived at by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the present case is wholly based on relevant considerations and appraisal of the materials on record. In our opinion, no statable question of law arises from the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
4. In the result, this application fails and is dismissed with costs which are assessed at Rs. 125 (Rupees one hundred and twenty-five).
Alert