9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Sargam Cinema Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax [2009 (10) TMI 569 - Supreme Court of India], wherein it has been observed that the Assessing Authority could not refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer in a case where there was a categorical finding recorded by the Tribunal that the books of account were never rejected – Decided against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 131 (1)(d) of the I.T.Act to District Valuation Officer was justified. 2. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that Assessing Officer had not rejected books of account of the assessee whereas rejection of books of account is not a necessary condition for addition u/s 69 of the I.T.Act, 1961. The brief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing. The Tribunal had upheld the validity of the reference made under Section 131(1)(d) of the Act by observing that after insertion of Section 142A with retrospective effect from 15.11.1972, the reference made under Section 131(1)(d) will be deemed to have been made under Section 142-A of the Act. He further submits that the issue relating to the validity of the reference to DVO was not before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account is not desirable. In the case of CIT Vs. M/s Institute of Literacy Development, ITA 180/2008 dated 16th September, 2013, this Hon'ble Court observed that on the basis of the approved valuer, the assessee has declared the investment of the building, but the A.O. was not satisfied. So, he has referred the matter to the DVO who again estimated the cost and made the additions. Estimation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
