IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 318 OF 2009 TAX APPEAL NO. 318 OF 2009 TAX APPEAL NO. 318 OF 2009 M/s.International Book House Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. ... Appellant. V/s. The Income Tax Officer & another. ... Respondents. S.N.Inamdar with Atul Jasani for the appellant. P.S.Sahadevan for the respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED DATED DATED : 16th April 2009. : 16th April 2009. : 16th April 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : ---- ---- ---- . Heard learned counsel for the rival parties. Perused impugned order. 2. By this appeal, the following reframed question of law is sought to be raised: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in substituting an ad-hoc & arbitrary formula to determine fair market value of tenancy rights as on 1.4.1981 in place of valuation done by approved valuer based on comparable instances? 3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the appellant- assessee brought to our notice the finding recorded by the Tribunal reading as under: "16. ..... The cost being fair market value of the acquisition of the tenancy rights as on 1.4.1981 is to be allowed in the hands of the assessee and not the fair market value of the property as claimed by the assessee. The assessee had acquired the tenanted premises on 11.5.1977 and the fair market value is to be determined as on 1.4.1981. The net consideration has been fixed at Rs.1,25,000/- as per our decision in paras herein above and adopting the same as the base we direct the Assessing Officer to increase the same by 15% appreciation in each year and work out the cost of acquisition of tenancy rights in the premises as on 1.4.1981. The Assessing Officer is directed to recompute the income from capital gains on sale of tenancy rights in the hands of the assessee accordingly." 4. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee urged that the formula adopted by the Tribunal has no base and the same is arbitrary in the facts and circumstances of the case. Learned counsel appearing for the revenue, while reacting to this submission, urged that the matter be remitted back to the assessing officer for reconsideration of this issue since it would involve appreciation of evidence which is already on record in the form of valuation. He further submits that it would also be open for the Revenue to lead further evidence, if permissible. Both parties, therefore, came out with the joint proposal that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the assessing officer for reconsideration. 5. In the above view of the matter, by consent of parties, dispensing with the reasons in support of this order, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the assessing officer for consideration afresh. The assessing officer is expected to deal with and decide the matter with expeditious despatch. All rival contentions on merits are kept open. 6. Appeal is disposed of in terms of this order with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, (J.P.DEVADHAR, (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) J.) J.) (V.C.DAGA (V.C.DAGA (V.C.DAGA J.) J.) J.)