9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt as per the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) - HELD THAT:- We find that once the Assessing Officer has referred the valuation of the property to the DVO, then he ought to have waited for the DVO s report to ascertain the fair market value of the property for the purchase as per the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since the Assessing Officer has made the additions without waiting for the DVO s report, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue afresh after taking into account the report submitted by the DVO. Hence, we set aside the issue and remit back the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer and direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rchased a property vide Document No.5883/2013; dated 11.10.2013 for a consideration of Rs.80,82,900/-, whereas the guideline value of the property fixed by the Sub- Registrars' Office [SRO] was at Rs.2,83,00,000/-. Therefore, the Assessee was called upon to explain as to why the difference between the consideration paid and the guideline value of the property amounting to Rs.2,02,17,100/- has not been added u/s.50C of the Act. 3. In response to the same, the Assessee had submitted that the matter may be referred to the Departmental Valuation Officer [DVO] for determining the correct market value of the property. The Assessing Officer referred the valuation of the property to the DVO. However, since the valuation report was not forthc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... VO. 6. The learned Departmental Representative, Shri. Chinthapalli Meher Chand, JCIT supporting the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) submitted that, as per the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the difference between the consideration paid and the guideline value fixed by the SRO should be assessed as income of the Assessee and thus, there is no error for the reasons given by the Assessing Officer in making the addition and therefore the order should be upheld. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and had gone through the orders of authorities below. As per the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if there is a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1961. Since the Assessing Officer has made the additions without waiting for the DVO s report, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue afresh after taking into account the report submitted by the DVO. Hence, we set aside the issue and remit back the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment and consider the issue in accordance with law after taking into account the valuation report submitted by the DVO. 9. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I.T.A. No.482/Chny/2020 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the court on 20th September, 2022 at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
