9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed in CC 22, New Delhi and notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 8.7.2009 and the assessee filed the return of income u/s 153A of the Act on 4.8.2009 at the original income. During the year under appeal, the assessee company is engaged in the business of providing heavy earth movers equipments and construction machinery, plants, equipments, accessories etc. On hire/lease. Return u/s 153A declaring income of Rs. 24,020/- was filed on 4.8.2009 and the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 1,89,00,030/-. For the A.Y. 2005-06, the assessee filed a return of income u/s 153A declaring 'Nil' income and the A.O. assessed the total income at Rs. 2,87,00,000/-. 2.1. The First Appellate Authority allowed the appeal of the assessee. 2.2. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds. ITA 505/Del/12 for the AY 2004-05: "1. On facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,87,99,500/- made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in property. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in brushing aside the evidentiary value of the Valuation Report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Valuation Cell of the I.T. and that of taken by the Assistant Valuation Officer of Rs. 1,87,99,500/- is treated as unaccounted income of the assessee company. Hence, the same is added to the total income of the assessee company. 21. Reliance in this regard is placed on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 and Durga Prasad More 1971 82 ITR 540 (SC). &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt does not attract Section 50-C which is a special provision for full value of consideration in certain cases and which being a "deeming provision" has to be strictly construed. Additionally, the appellant has contended that no circle rates for stamp valuation purpose were applicable during the time of date of transfer in case of the appellant and that the same was introduced vide notification dated 18.7.2007. That accordingly in absence of any circle rate no addition can be made u/s 50C of the Act for which it was required that the process as ingrained in section 50C should have been followed and the reference to DVO should have been made u/s 55A of the Act and not u/s 142A. It is also noted that the sale instance taken by the Valuation Officer that prima facie it is not a comparable one for the reason that the sale instance property was at a better location and was subjected to auction, which may fetch a better price than fair market value on account of competitive bidding. Secondly the unit rate sale consideration of the appellant is better than the other sale instances of adjacent property relied upon by the appellant during the appellate proceedings. The appellant's arg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arrived at net realisable value as on 31.8.2004 at Rs. 3,32,00,000/- and considered this figure as the purchase consideration paid. 9.1. As the assessee had purchased the said property for the total consideration of Rs. 45 lakhs, the difference between Rs. 3,32,00,000 and Rs. 45,00,000/- is taxed as unaccounted income u/s 68 of the Act during the year. The amount so taxed is Rs. 2,87,00,000/-. 9.2. The First Appellate Authority deleted the addition on the ground that: (a) no incriminating documents or material was found to prove that the assessee has made unaccounted investment in the purchase of the property at Plot no.217, Block C, Rewari Line Industrial Area, Phase II, New Delhi 110 064. (b) On reference to the D.V.O. u/s 142A of the Act by the Assessing Officer, the value of such property was determined at Rs. 46,96,000 and whereas the assessee has paid purchase consideration of only Rs. 45 lakhs. (c ) There is nothing irregular or illegal on the part of the AO for making reference to the DVO for valuation of the property. (d) The valuation report given by the valuer of Punjab National Bank, at a much later point of time, cannot be taken as the cost of investment by the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... much as AO had not first recorded that there was an excess expenditure incurred by assessee in acquiring articles. Whether, on the facts, finding recorded by Tribunal was correct. Held, Yes." (2) CIT vs. Anil Arora (ITA 340/2015) judgement dt. 22.5.2015 (Del) wherein it is held as follows. "Having heard the Ld.Counsel for the Revenue, we find the contentions argued in the appeal to be wholly misplaced. It is fairly conceded (at bar) by the Counsel for the Revenue that the reference to DVO for estimation of the market value of the property in Punjabi Bagh was not based on any material discovered or seized during the search operations. The Counsel, however, referred to the case of another property in District Baddi (Himachal Pradesh), in respect of which documentary evidence indicated unaccounted consideration paid by the assessee, referred to by the A.O. in para 4.3 of his order. At the same time, Ld.Counsel also conceded that no addition to the tax liability of the assessee on account of the said other property has been made. There is no nexus between the property in Baddi (Himachal Pradesh) and the property in Punjabi Bagh (West). There is undoubtedly no material available to ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
