9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Officer, Ward-2(4), Durgapur (in brevity the 'AO') passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 28.06.2019. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned additions/ disallowances are perverse, rather against evidence and material on record and without an iota of material or evidence to support and sustain the same. 2. (a) For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned addition amounting to Rs. 5,44,730/- on account of the difference between the Registered Value as per Departmental Valuation Officer and set fourth value sustained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) - NFAC u/s 56(2)(viib) is purely o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty as entrance is through some else's plot in all sides" since it is a land locked plot, Realisable market value of Property as on date will be 50 percent of Market Value of Rs. 15,50,000/- i.e. Rs. 7,75,000/- as per Independent Valuation Report and the impugned addition is without any logical basis and ought to be deleted in entirety. 3. For that, the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any Ground at any time before or at the time of hearing." 3. The brief fact of the case is that the assessee had filed return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. During the impugned assessment year, the assessee sold two fixed assets in nature of lands with a total consideration amounted to Rs. 11,72,160/-. The market value of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsideration of Rs. 11,72,160/-, the market value of which was assessed by registration authority for stamp duty purpose was Rs. 35,86,929/-. The AO had added the difference between market value and purchase value of Rs. 24,14,769/- as income from other source u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of IT Act 1961 to the returned income. The AO had also referred the case to DVO for getting the valuation report considering the facts of the case. The report from DVO was not received till finalisation of case. Finally the AO had added the said difference amount. 5.2 During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has stated that he is having four different valuations of a single property, which is tabulated as under:- S. No. Description Area (in dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly indicates that the property is entirely a land locked property in consideration of the other properties. The photograph is duly inserted as below: 8. The ld. A/R respectfully relied on the order of the different Hon'ble High Courts and Hon'ble Apex Court which are reproduced as below: "In the case of CIT vs. Naveen Gera [2010] 328 ITR 516, Delhi High Court held as under: - "We are also in agreement with the submission made by Mr. Piyush Kaushik that it is settled law that in the absence of any incriminating evidence that anything has been paid over and above than the stated amount, the primary burden of proof is on the Revenue to show that there has been an understatement or concealment of income. It is only when such bur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue that the assessee had received amounts over and above the consideration stated in the sale deeds, following Varghese [1981 ] 131 ITR 597 (SC). Varghese [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) had also been followed and applied by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Godavari Corporation Ltd. [1993] 200 ITR 567. The Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Ashok Khetrapal [2007] 294 ITR 143 referred to the report of a Valuation Officer in the absence of any incriminating documents found in the course of a search. The decision in CIT v. Manoj Jain [2006] 287 ITR 285 (Delhi) is also to the same effect. In CIT v. Shivakami Co. P. Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 71 (SC) their Lordships have once again reiterated that the onus whether the assessee had received more considerati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d is mentioned in report dated 08-04-2021, the report of DVO APB page 12. The relevant paragraph is culled as below: - "The property containing one No. land plot vide p R.S. & L.R. plot No. 22 is situated within Bagan area within Mouza-Pratap PUR J.L. 48 P.S. Faridpur Dist. Burdwan. There is no direct connecting road except a kancha village road nearby next plot. The property is situated at very distant place from Durgapur city. The amenities search s market, hospital, school, college etc. are available within 10-15 Km distance" 11. The ld. A/R respectfully relied on the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dhariya Construction Co. (supra) and the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Naveen Gera (supra) and Sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
