9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1015X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.. 18243128/- u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 disregarding the serious objection raised by the appellant about the correctness of the stamp duty valuation. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has further erred in not appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer having found favour with the contention of the appellant disputing the stamp duty valuation did make the reference to Asst. Valuation Officer, Solapur and inspite of that Assessing Officer and CIT(A) as well as the appellant could not get the benefit of valuation report of the Asst. Valuation Officer and consequently sustenance of the addition is not legal and correct. The above gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Pune dated 20/10/2020." 3. Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the assessment order and as seen from the copy of the return filed in the paper book, are thatthe assessee filed return of income for the year on 27/09/2014 electronically, showing income from salary of Rs.1,80,000/-, Income from other Sources Rs. 73208/- and Agricultural Income of Rs.9,96,939/-. 3.1. It was observed by the Assessing Officer(AO)that as per the information of AIR, the assessee had entered into a registered Sale Deed on 11/03/2014, vide which the assessee purchased a piece of land of 0.40 hecter R (40000sq ft) at village Dhanori from Mrs.Karam Jit Kour w/o Labh Singh (vendor). Copy of the said Sale deed is part of the paper book. The sale consideration as p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... records, regarding purchase of land, the said information was containing name of the vendor, vendee, actual consideration and market value. The said information was received as AIR i.e Annual Information Report. Based on the information, the Assessing Officer was asked to verify. The AIR information was forwarded by CBDT to the AO. The AO made addition based on the said information. Therefore, there is no merit in the argument of the Ld.AR. The Ld.DR further submitted that the case law relied by the Ld.AR is on the issue of 'Reasons Recorded for Reopening'. Therefore, the said case laws are not applicable as it is distinguishable on facts. 4.2 Decision: We have heard both the parties and perused the record.The Additional grounds are admitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parameter(s ) of AIR/CIB/26AS data . In such cases, the Assessing Officer, shall also confine the Questionnaire only to the specific issues pertaining to AIR/CIB/26AS data. Wider scrutiny in these cases can only be conducted as per the guidelines and procedures stated in Instruction No. 7/2014. 4.3 There is no dispute that the case was selected for limited scrutiny on the parameters of AIR. Therefore, as per the CBDT instruction 20/2015, the AO had power to investigate issue pertaining to AIR information. In this case, it is a fact that AIR information did mention market value of the property. Therefore, AO had rightly invoked provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b). 4.4. Hence, the Additional Ground No."I" is dismissed. Other Additional Gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
