The court's decision highlights the limited scope for interference in findings of fact by the Tribunal in appeals under Section 260a of the Income-tax Act.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the Department.

( 2 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 260a of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by which the order of the income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated January 31, 2003, has been challenged.

( 3 ) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties we find no merit in this appeal. We have carefully perused the impugned order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has from paragraphs 9 to 15 of the impugned order considered all aspects of the matter in great detail and has held that the area in which the land in question was located was not fully developed and no civic amenities were available in 1981. It has also been held that the land in question was developed after a period of 14 years from April 1, 1981, after the master plan was announced and there was not much potentiality for the use of the land for development purpose as on April 1, 1981. The land in question is situate on the road from Gorakhpur to Pipriah Kasba and this road is neither a national highway nor a State highway. The land in question was not surrounded by developed colonies in 1981. It was agricultural land up to 1994. In our opinion, these are findings of fact which we cannot interfere with in an appeal under Section 260a of the Income-tax Act.

( 4 ) IN fact the Appellate Tribunal has fixed the maximum rate of rupees one lakh per acre instead of Rs. 70,000 per acre for determining the market value and cost of acquisition as on April 1, 1981, for the purpose of computing the capital gain under Section 48 of the Income-tax Act. The tribunal has already been indulgent to the appellant by granting the maximum rate.

( 5 ) THERE is no force in this appeal and it is dismissed.

. .

Click Here to Read the rest of this document