Case Law Details
Case Name : Income Tax Officer– 19(3)(3) Vs Ms. Noella P. Perry (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2006- 07
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Mumbai
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
ITO Vs. Ms. Noella P. Perry (ITAT Mumbai)
The ITAT Mumbai Bench ‘B’ heard an appeal by the Income-tax Officer against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in the case of Ms. Noella P. Perry for the assessment year 2006-07. The appeal raised two main issues: determining the cost of acquisition for a house property acquired before 1st April 1981 and establishing the date from which the cost inflation index (CFI) should be applied.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
SElf- Moderation/ Error correction: What has been reported is an ORDER of ITAT ; not a HC Judgment ! May be appropriately READ !!
courtesy
Having been given the privilege of ‘THE FIRST ONE TO COMMENT’, to share my own TENTATIVE REACTIONs:
1. IN the absence of any update, it may be safely assumed that the dispute was not pursued any further. IN other words, the REVENUE has accepted and impliedly conceded the HC Judgment as FINAL and THE PRECEDENT to be followed!? That stands to be readily inferred from the FACT that, so far as known, no AO has challenged FMV being adopted, in respect of the FYE 31-03-2021, and backwards, even after the 1987 Amendment of the law and introduction of the NEW TABLE; despite the OLD TABLE being applicable for and upto the FYE 31-03- 1986?! These observations DO require to be kept in the BACKDROP in discussing the implications and impact of changes made in FORM 2, lately, for FYE s 2021-22 and2022-23 – AGREE!
(^Left UNEDI ted)
courtesy
OVER TO EDMN.