(Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN, J.) The revenue on appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras ''A' Bench, Chennai, dated 09.07.2009 passed in ITA No.75/Mds/2009, relating to the assessment year 2002-03 by formulating the following question of law:-
" Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in fixing different market value for the same property among the co-owners for the purpose of computation of capital gain?".
2. The facts:- (i) The assessee owned property in No.82, 96, 90 P.H. Road along with her brothers and mother. Out of the total extent of 28106 sq.ft. 14053 sq.ft. was sold, in which the assessee's undivided share is 7991.6 sq.ft. In the case of the mother of the assessee, in respect of the very same transaction, the matter went upto the Tribunal level and the Tribunal in its order dated 14.03.2008 in I.T.A.No.1856/Mds/2007 upheld the fair market value fixed by the Commissioner of Income Tax at Rs.225/- per sq.ft. In the case of the assessee, the Assessing Officer fixed the value at Rs.83.33 per sq.ft. based on the details obtained from the Sub-Registrar. The guideline value obtained from the Sub-Registrar has been adopted for arriving at the fair market value as against the assessee's valuation of Rs.412 per sq.ft.
(ii) On appeal, at the instance of the assessee, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) relying on the assessee's mother's case in I.T.A.No.1856/Mds/2007 dated 14.03.2008 fixed the value at Rs.225/- per sq.ft.
(iii) Aggrieved against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the revenue carried the matter on appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by relying on the same order dated 14.03.2008 made in in I.T.A.No.1856/Mds/2007, upheld the fair market value fixed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal).
(iv) In those factual circumstances, the revenue on appeal before this Court by formulating the question of law referred to above.
3. We have heard the argument of Mr.Patty B.Jeganathan, learned counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record.
4. on a perusal, it is clear that in respect of the other co-sharer in I.T.A.No.1856/Mds/2007 dated 14.03.2008, the Tribunal has upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), wherein fair market value has been adopted at Rs.225/- per sq.ft. The same amount has been adopted in the case of assessee also. In the absence of any other distinguishing factor or any other additional factor placed before us or argued before us to take a different view, we are not able to see any question of law, much less substantial question of law in this case for determination. Hence, this appeal is dismissed. No costs.
(K.R.P.,J.) (M.M.S.,J.) 22.12.2009 Index : Yes/ Internet : Yes/ rg K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN, J.
And M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
rg To
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai
2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench, Chennai.
T.C.(A)No.1407 of 2009 22.12.2009