9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO referred the valuation of the plot to DVO, under section 55A((b)(ii). No report was received till the framing of the assessment order on 21.12.2010, which the AO mentions in the order. 4. The CIT received a proposal for revising the said assessment from the AO on 19.03.2012. It was pointed out that actually the property was sold for Rs. 80 lacs. The AO also informed the CIT that on receipt of report from DVO, it was seen that the valuation came to Rs. 1,20,93,200/- and valuation as on 01.04.1981 came at Rs. 3,34,500/-. The AO, therefore intimated, that based on these facts and figures, capital gain would require re-computation. 5. On this information received as a proposal from the AO, the CIT initiated revision proceedings under sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uge demand of Rs. 20,22,300/-. (5) That I am an engineer by qualification and being a retired person was appearing in my own matters till that stage. (6) That faced with this huge demand, I realized that I would need professional help. To that purpose I approached Smt. Ritika Agarwal, CA LLB, (Advocate High Court). She advised me to file an appeal against the assessment order dated 29/11/2013 passed u/s 143(3) r w s 263. She further advised me to file an appeal albeit belatedly against the order u/s 263 dated 5/02/2013 as well, since it was the foundation of the assessment order dated 29/11/2013. (7) That based upon such professional advice, I have filed an appeal against the order u/s 263 of the Act. (8) That, I humbly submit befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ake a mockery of enacted law, because law & provisions are laid down to benefit both sides of litigation. Be that as it may, we have to do justice and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji and others , reported in 167 ITR 471, (1988 SC 897) (7) observes .... 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a nondeliberate delay. 13. When we weigh these two aspects then the side of justice becomes heavier and casts a duty on us to deliver justice. 14. We, therefore, condone the delay and proceed with the appeal as f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... records of any proceedings under this Act, and if he considers ...", which means that proposal for initiation of revision proceedings must be initiated by the CIT, because, it is the CIT who has to call for and examine the records. But in the instant case the proposal came from the AO and on receipt of the proposal, the CIT initiated revision proceedings. Therefore, in our opinion, the proceeding gets flagged at the threshold. 17. Since the proceedings got in the infirmity zone at the first stage, it is not necessary for us to proceed further on merits. 18. We, therefore, hold that the proceedings were bad in law and thus subsequent proceedings are annulled. 19. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
