2019 (11) TMI 1795 - AT - Income Tax

Capital gain - valuation of the fair market value of the impugned property - appeal of the learned CIT(A) was adjourned on multiple occasions at the instance of the Chartered Accountant for want of valuation report of the DVO - HELD THAT - The perusal of the order of CIT(A) shows that in para 6, CIT(A) has recorded multiple opportunities, wherein it is alleged that the assessee has sought adjournment. Revenue is not able to produce any record to show that the DVO s report called for u/s. 50(C)(2) has been produced. Without the said valuation report, admittedly the hearing of the assessee s appeal would be in futility. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issue in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for re-adjudication after receipt of the valuation report by the DVO u/s. 50(C)(2) of the Act. Appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order of CIT(A) regarding dismissal of assessee's appeal due to lack of valuation report from DVO under section 50(C)(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by the assessees for the assessment year 2016-17. The Assessee's representative argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal despite the DVO's valuation report not being available, which was requested by the assessee. The Assessing Officer had referred the case to the valuation cell for the fair market value of the property, subject to rectification according to the Valuation Officer's report. The Authorized Representative highlighted this point. The Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A).

Upon reviewing the submissions and the available records, the Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had noted multiple adjournments sought by the assessee but found no evidence of the DVO's report being produced as requested under section 50(C)(2) of the Act. Without this valuation report, the hearing of the assessee's appeal would be futile. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the issue in the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication after the receipt of the valuation report by the DVO as per the Act. Consequently, both appeals filed by the assessees were partly allowed for statistical purposes.

The judgment was pronounced on the 19th day of November 2019 in Chennai by Shri George Mathan, Judicial Member.