9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he books were never rejected. In the circumstances, reliance placed on the report of the DVO was misconceived. - Decided in favour of assessee. - T.C. (A) No.526 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 20-9-2017 - Indira Banerjee, CJ And M. Sundar, JJ. For Appellant : Mr.S.Rajesh JUDGMENT ( Judgment of the Court was delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice ) This appeal filed by the Revenue is against an order dated 19.02.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dismissing the appeal being I.T.A.No.1723/Mds/2012 filed by the Revenue against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VIII, Chennai, dated 14.06.2012, deleting certain additions made by the Assessing Officer to the income decla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) VIII, which was registered as I.T.A.No.121/11-12(A)-VIII. The appeal was allowed by an order dated 14.06.2012, whereby the addition of ₹ 3,31,92,190/- was deleted. 5.In deleting the addition, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) accepted the contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer could not have made a reference to the District Valuation Officer for estimation of the cost, when the books of accounts of the assessee had not been rejected. Reliance was, in this context, placed on a decision of this Court in Arosan Subbiah vs. CIT, reported in 20 DTR 113 (2009). 6.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further found that in any case, the difference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidered as income in the hands of the purchasers. 9.The finding that additional constructions were made by purchasers and the cost thereof could not be added to the income of the respondent-assessee is a factual finding, which does not warrant inteference under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act. 10.The question of whether cost of construction can be referred to the District Valuation Officer for estimation without first rejecting the books of accounts maintained by the respondent-assessee has been answered in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court in Sargam Cinema vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC). 11.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-Revenue has drawn our attention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
