9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cross objection arising out of I.T.A. No. 713/LKW/2013 and the said cross objection was also heard along with the appeals and is being disposed of through this order. 4. Through these appeals though the orders of the ld. CIT(A) are challenged by the assessee as well as the Revenue on different grounds, but the common factor involved in all these appeals is that these appeals are emanated from the assessment order framed under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called in short "the Act") read with section 144(1) of the Act. 5. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention that the reopening was done on the basis of the valuation report received from the DVO. The ld. counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessing Officer has made reference to the DVO. Therefore the reference was made by the Assessing Officer to the DVO even without application of mind to the books of account maintained by the assessee in which investment in property was shown. Therefore, reference to the DVO is also bad in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sargam Cinema vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 513 (SC), as the reference was made without rejecting the books of account. In the light of these facts, all the assessments framed consequent to the reopening of the assessment in different assessment years on the basis of the DVO's report is bad and therefore deserves to be quashed. 6. The ld. D.R. has simply placed reliance upon the orders o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground no. 1, the appellant has objected to the validity of proceedings, initiated on the basis of the report of a valuer. The crux of the issue is the validity of notice issued under section 148 of the Act on the basis of reasons recorded under section 147 of the Act. I therefore reproduce the reasons recorded by the AO which are as under: - "The assessee is a registered medical practitioner. He constructed a house property, stated to be jointly along with his wife, Smt. Manju Surtani. During the course of assessment proceedings for AY 2003-04 the property was referred to the Valuation Officer, Val. Cell, I.T. Deptt., Allahabad to work out the year wise cost of investment in the property. The V.O. submitted his report dated 31.10.2005 es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to believe that owing to failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment, income of Rs. 2,73,752/-besides the unexplained investment out of Rs. 2,99,204/- (declared investment of the assessee), if any, has escaped the assessment for AY 2002-03." 4.1 From the above reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, it is apparent that his belief that some income has escaped assessment is only on the basis of D.V.O. report because he has worked out the difference in the amount of investment as per the investment declared by the assessee and as per D.V.O. report. For the present year, this difference has been noted by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 2,73,725/-. Thereafter, the CIT(A) has decid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s judicial pronouncements including the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) wherein it was held that the opinion given by the District Valuation Officer is not per se information for the purpose of reopening an assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act. Considering all these facts and legal position, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A). 8. In all the assessment years the reopening was done by the Assessing Officer on the basis of same DVO's report. Therefore, the impugned issue of validity of reopening of assessment on the basis of the DVO's report is covered by the aforesaid order of the Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he eyes of law and deserves to be quashed. 10. In view of the fact of the matter, the reopening of assessment in all the impugned assessment years is bad on both the counts. We, therefore, have no hesitation in quashing all the assessments framed consequent to the invalid reopening of the assessment on the basis of the valuation report. 11. The cross objection is filed by the assessee against I.T.A. No. 713/LKW/2013 which was already disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2014. Therefore, the cross objection has become infructuous and we accordingly dismiss the same. 12. In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed and the cross objection of the assessee is also dismissed. Order was pronounced in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
