2014 (9) TMI 52 - HC - Income Tax

Block assessment made Deletion of addition made by Tribunal Undervaluation of cost of land and building - whether on the basis of the material collected subsequently and that too during the course of the block assessment proceedings u/s 158BC of the Act, such addition could have been made - Held that - The AO directed to make addition being the difference of value of land and the cost of construction with respect to the building Ravi Darshan on the basis of the report of the District Valuation Officer, which was obtained during the course of the block assessment proceedings Following the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kantilal B. Kansara (HUF) 2010 (8) TMI 741 - Gujarat High Court - addition u/s 158BD of the Act can be made only in respect of the material disclosed at the time of search or pursuant to any inquiry made in relation to the search - the addition was made by the AO solely based upon the report made by the District Valuation Officer, which was referred during the course of the assessment proceedings - the report of the DVO cannot be stated to be material found during the course of the search and addition made on the basis of the District Valuation Officer s report was not permissible thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition of undisclosed income based on valuation report in block assessment proceedings under section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding the addition of Rs. 10,23,545 into the income of the assessee for allegedly undervaluing the cost of construction of a building named 'Ravi Darshan.' The AO relied on a report by the District Valuation Officer obtained during block assessment proceedings to make this addition. The Tribunal, however, deleted this addition, stating that as the building was stock in trade, any addition for unexplained investment would be offset by deductions for arriving at profits. The Revenue challenged this deletion.

2. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal erred in deleting the addition, as the AO was justified in relying on the valuation report and the provisions of section 69C of the Act were not considered. On the other hand, the assessee contended that the difference in valuation could not be added as undisclosed income in block assessment proceedings based on a report obtained during assessment. The assessee cited relevant case laws to support this argument.

3. The Court noted that the AO's addition was solely based on the District Valuation Officer's report obtained during the block assessment proceedings, not from material found during the search or inquiry. Referring to the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kantilal B. Kansara, the Court held that additions under section 158BD can only be made based on material disclosed during the search or related inquiry. As the valuation report was not part of the search material, the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition was upheld.

4. Consequently, the Court dismissed the tax appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The decision was based on the principle that additions in block assessment proceedings must stem from material discovered during the search or inquiry, not from subsequent reports. No costs were awarded in the case.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal issues, arguments presented by both parties, relevant case laws cited, and the court's reasoning leading to the final decision.