TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Departmental Valuation Officer u/s 142A. It is also mentioned that the ld. CIT(Appeals) wrongly relied on judgments delivered prior to introduction of section 142A by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 retrospectively with effect from 15.11.1972. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed her return on 31.07.2007 declaring income of ₹ 2,338/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 18.03.2009. Notices u/s 143(2) were also issued on 18.07.2008 and 24.07.2008. 2.1 In the assessment made u/s 143(3), the AO had made an addition of ₹ 2,81,83,000/- u/s 69B of the Act. The enquiry was initiated on the basis of AIR that she purchased a property on 03.05.2006 for a sum of ₹ 42.50 lakh and again on 03.11.2006 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sale instance is in respect of the property in Civil Lines, however, the sale was effected on 31.07.1996, i.e., 10 years prior to the year under consideration. The other sale instance is of Model Town area which is located quite far off from Civil Lines. Therefore, he came to the conclusion that none of the instances were comparable to the property acquired by the assessee. Coming to the legal ground, an analogy was drawn from the decision in the case of K.P. Verghese that it is for the revenue to bring some evidence on record to show that the purchase consideration has been under-stated, failing which the provision u/s 69B will not be applicable. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder section 153A of the Income-tax Act pursuant to search at the premises of the assessees carried out by the Department under section 132 of the Act. While carrying out the assessment, the Assessing Officer found that one of the properties, i.e., 101, Ground floor, Bangala Sahib Road, New Delhi, was acquired by Shri Bhagirath Agrawal and Suraj Devi at a cost of ₹ 62,50,000/-. This property was rented to Indian Overseas Bank. The said property was purchased in the joint names with different shares given to different assessees. The matter was referred to the Valuation Cell of the Department under section 142(1A) of the Act. The valuer valued the property at much higher rate than the consideration shown in the sale deed and on the basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
