2010 (5) TMI 808 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Addition of unaccounted investment based on DVO report without evidence of additional payment by the assessee.

The High Court dismissed the appeal by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2003-04. The Assessing Officer had made an addition in respect of unaccounted investment based solely on the DVO's report regarding a share in property purchased by the assessee. Both the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Tribunal ruled against the Revenue, stating that the addition could not be made solely on the basis of the DVO report without evidence of additional payment by the assessee to the seller. The Tribunal cited the Supreme Court's decision in K.P. Varghese vs. ITO and this Court's decision in CIT vs. Shakuntala Devi, emphasizing that the Revenue must establish that the assessee received amounts over and above the consideration stated in the sale deed before relying on the DVO's valuation. The Tribunal's decision was in line with established legal principles, and there was no substantial question of law involved in the case.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the importance of the Revenue discharging the burden of proving additional payments by the assessee before making inferences against them based on the DVO's valuation.