Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (3) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e. Deletion made u/s 69C of the Act – Undisclosed expenditure/investment in house property – difference between valuation – Reference made to valuation officer u/s 55A of the Act - Held that:- It cannot be said that any incriminating material or evidence was found during the search & seizure operation - CIT(A) has rightly noticed that in the absence of any such material the very reference to Valuation Officer is vitiated in law - No defect or shortcomings were found in the details submitted by the assessee so as to justify the reference to the Valuation Officer - The difference between the value as per valuation report and expenses as per the books of account is reduced to less than 15% which can also be justified on account of normal p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unt of Rs.38,000/- (Rs.96,000 - 58,000) was considered to be unexplained expenditure incurred by the assessee for household expenses. 4. Aggrieved by the stand so taken, the assessee carried the mater in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) was of the considered view that the A.O. has failed to bring on record any cogent material to justify the addition in question, and that in any event, no incriminating material has been found towards any excess expenditure having been incurred by the assessee towards his household expenses. With these observations, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition. The A.O. is aggrieved and is in appeal before us. 5. Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .Y. 2002-03 and Rs.21,45,991/- in the A.Y. 2003-04, the Valuation Officer, to whom reference was made for valuating these renovation and constructions, estimated the expenses at Rs.12,31,768/- and Rs.41,27,032/- respectively. The A.O., based on the estimation of the Valuation Officer, made an addition of Rs.19,81,041/- as unexplained expenditure. 9. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) in his very detailed and erudite order deleted the impugned addition on more grounds than one. The ld. CIT(A) was of the considered view that the very reference made to the Valuation Officer was unsustainable in law as neither there was any incriminating material/document found during the course of sear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nstitutes incriminating material. Our attention was invited to the observation made in the appraisal report to the fact that assessee's house was beautifully constructed in huge area in the posh locality of Kamala Nagar, Agra and investment in renovation/alternation from the period from 01.04.2002 to till current financial year needs thorough examination 11. It was submitted by the ld. Departmental Representative that this appraisal report constitutes incriminating material and when observation in this regard is based on some material, reference to the valuation officer is justified. He also submitted that in the normal course of assessment it is not possible for the Revenue authorities to see as to what is the quality of construct .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (A). In his brief rejoinder, the ld. Departmental Representative once again submitted that the quality of construction and lavish renovation could only have been seen when the Revenue authorities had the opportunity to visit the assessee's premises and, therefore, the results of this visual examination should also be considered as incriminating material justifying reference to Valuation Officer. He thus urged us to vacate the relief so granted by the ld. CIT(A) and restore the order of A.O. 13. Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, we are of the considered view that on facts of the case it cannot be said that any incriminating material or evidence was found during the search seizure operation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates