TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee had purchased a property at 2nd Floor, G-25, Green Park (Main), New Delhi for a consideration of Rs. 11,84,926/-. Since the valuation was found to be on lower side, the AO made the reference to District Valuation Officer (DVO) under Section 142A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). DVO could not send report and therefore, the AO framed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act on the basis of material available accepting the same income. On receipt of valuation from DVO, the AO found difference of Rs. 48,68,774/- between the valuation made by the DVO and value declared by the assessee. 2. Armed with this Report, the AO issued notice to the assessee under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for brevity). The Department challenged reduction of Rs. 10 lacs by the CIT (A) and the assessee challenged the addition made by the AO on the basis of valuation. The Tribunal has passed a common order allowing the appeal of the assessee and dismissing the appeal of the Revenue. The Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 48,68,774/- made by the AO on account of difference between the value determined by the DVO and the purchase consideration shown by the assessee holding that the reference made by the AO invoking the provisions of Section 142A was without jurisdiction and therefore, no addition could have been made by the AO on the basis of valuation made by the DVO. 5. Questioning the aforesaid order of the Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal, it is noticed that the assessee did represent before the A.O. that the valuation report of the DVO contains various defects. This was done by a letter-dated 17.11.2006. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the A.O. has not considered the objection filed by the assessee. It is further noticed that the CIT (A) has considered the objection and has found weight in the objection and had consequently made an ad hoc reduction of Rs. 10 lacs from the addition made by the A.O. which was on the basis of the difference between the value as declared by the assessee and the value as estimated by the DVO. The CIT (A) has further rejected the comparative cases given by the assessee which relates to sale of property executed in 2001 to 2003 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
