IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 ITA.No. 1024 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.136/COCH//2005 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COCHIN BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ R.RAJENDRA PRASAD, DY.TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-2. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 1024 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. The question raised in the departmental appeal is whether the Tribunal is justified in adopting PWD valuation for valuing un- explained investment in respect of construction of a house. The assessing officer went by the CPWD norms. All what the Tribunal did was to permit the assessee to adopt PWD valuation. Since in similar cases, we have taken the view that valuation under local conditions is only what is approved by the Tribunal, because only local rates based on local conditions are prescribed by the PWD, we do not find anything wrong in the Tribunal adopting valuation based on PWD norms. Consequently appeal is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C. K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk 2