9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 685X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nor any incriminating material has been found by the Revenue - Thus,there was no occasion to refer the property for valuation - Thus the assessee is engaged in the business of construction and sale and purchase of properties, the value has to be examined from the point of view of books of accounts and documents found and produced - Hence,the Assessing Officer has erred in referring to valuation ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to Valuation Cell for determining the value of property. The Valuation Cell valued the fair market value at Rs.62.44.810/-. In these circumstances, Assessing Officer held that Rs.32.44.810/- being the difference between the sale value declared and the valuation done by the valuation cell was to be added to the income of the assessee. 3. Upon assessee's appeal Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the purpose when the items involved is the one in which the assessee deals in. It is also to be noted that if the fair market value of the impugned property is held by the Valuation Cell to be of such higher amount, then the cost thereof would also be substantially of higher amount. 6. In these circumstances, we find that decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.P. Verghese vs. Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the addition in this regard. We hold that the Assessing Officer has erred in referring to valuation cell items in which assessee deals in. Accordingly, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the addition. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.2.2011 upon conclusion of the hearing. - - TaxTMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
