9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with. For this purpose, the Hon ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v/s ITO [ 1981 (9) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] is relevant. Accordingly, we affirm the orders of the learned CIT(A). Revision u/s 263 - Rectification u/s 154 as value by the DVO in the report received after the order of the learned CIT s order was sought to be substituted - HELD THAT:- The order of the learned CIT(A) has merged with the order and application by the Assessing Officer. Section 263 provides the power to the Commissioner to exercise his jurisdiction under section 263, on the orders of the Assessing Officer and not where the order of the Assessing Officer has merged with the order of the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT, in his wisdom has rejected the Assessing Officer s application under section 154. No appeal against the rejection has been preferred by the Revenue. Now, the Revenue has sought to revise the Assessing Officer s order under section 263, which has already merged with the order of the learned CIT(A). This is not at all legally permissible. The order of the Assessing Officer has merged with that of the learned CIT(A). Provisions of section 263, do not mandate the Commissioner to revise such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,15,83,382, made by the Assessing Officer on the ground of suppression of sale consideration of the immovable property. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in arriving at the conclusion regarding the sale consideration without waiting for DVO s report. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in accepting the sale consideration shown by the assessee as ₹ 3,57,62,000, whereas DVO s report received after 4 days after the receipts of CIT(A) s order values the transaction at ₹ 4,07,60,510. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in concluding that no opportunity was given to the assessee in connection with the reference to the mater to the DVO. 3. The issue pertains to the sale of property by the assessee. The Assessing Officer had referred to the District Valuation Officer for the valuation of the properties. Witho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer has substituted the values as per the registered sale deed on the basis of value obtained from his so called enquiry. The basis of this co called enquiry was not at all brought on record. This order of the Assessing Officer when challenged before the learned CIT was set aside by the learned CIT(A) on the basis that no addition can be made on the basis of so called local enquiry without any cogent basis. Now in appeal before the Tribunal, the Revenue has pleaded that the learned CIT(A) is not justified inasmuch as the DVO s report received after four days after the receipt of learned CIT(A) s values the transaction at a high cost. In this regard, it is clear that on merits, the Assessing Officer s order was not sustainable and the learned CIT has rightly deleted the addition based upon the Assessing Officer s uncorroborated local enquiry . By no stretch of imagination, it can be argued that the learned CIT(A) should have taken into account the DVO s report which was received four days after the passing of the learned CIT(A) s order. It is settled law that nobody can be asked to do the impossible. Under these circumstances, in our considered opinion, there in no inf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) of I.T.Act, 1961 and direct the A.O. to pass the order denovo after considering the report of DVO. While doing so he is directed to take objection of assessee on quantum of market value as advised by the DVO. He might seek comments from DVO on the objection of assessee and also on the objection of comparable cases. Reasonable opportunity of being heard be given to the assessee while passing the order afresh. 10. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 11. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We find that the facts stated in Revenue s appeals above precede the action taken by the learned CIT here. In this case, the Assessing Officer has moved an application under section 154 to the learned CIT, wherein the value by the DVO in the report received after the order of the learned CIT s order was sought to be substituted. In the order, the learned CIT(A) rejected that application for rectification under section 154. Under these circumstances, the order of the learned CIT(A) has merged with the order and application by the Assessing Officer. Section 263 provides the power to the Commissioner to exercise his j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
