9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0C and its applicability in the present case, nothing has been submitted before us to support such claim, in terms of corroborative evidence, also apparently no such claim was made before the AO while seeking rectification u/s 154, therefore, we are unable to consider and to persuade with such contention of the assessee under the grounds of appeal in the present case. As described by the CIT(A) allegations by the assessee are only averments with no cogent documentary support. Before us also the assessee has not placed any documentary evidence, so as to dislodge the decisions taken by the revenue authorities. Thus, we find substance in the decision of CIT(A) that the appellant has not pointed out any real defect in the valuation report of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty valuation, no further increase in warranted in the same. It is prayed that addition of Rs. 2,64,21,740/- made by Ld. AO on account of difference in book value of property (which value is equal to the stamp duty value) and value of same as per DVO valuation report may please be deleted. 2. On the fact and in circumstances of case and in the law and without prejudice to the above ground of appeal, the valuation done by the departmental Valuation officer (DVO) vide valuation report dt. 31.01.2022 and relied upon by Ld. AO cannot be treated as a proper valuation as the same has been done based on inappropriate documents and without appreciating all the relevant facts. It is prayed that addition of Rs. 2,64,21,740/- made by Ld. AO on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rse of Search & Seizure proceedings, which was higher than the value shown by the assessee in his books of accounts, therefore, a difference of Rs. 6,66,22,641/- was observed. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee was requested to explain the aforesaid variation, in response to which assessee submitted a written reply and also objected to accept the valuation of house and commercial building done by the registered valuer. Accordingly, a reference was made u/s 142A of the Act to District Valuation Officer (in short "DVO"), Bhopal, on 26.08.2021 by the Ld. AO, however, till the time of passing of assessment order, the DVO's report could not be obtained, therefore, the assessment was completed without referring to the DVO's rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee, with the following observations: During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has furnished documentary evidence. The documentary evidence kept on record. On examination of all these documents, that the appellant has duly filed the DVO report, the examine the DVO report the valuation of cost of commercial building has been done by the District Valuation Officer, Bhopal situated at S.H.Tower, Palasia, Great Kailash Road, Saket Chauraha Indore and the DVO has valued cost of land and building at Rs. 9,07,21,740/- whereas the assessee has shown the same in his books at Rs. 6,43,00,000/-. Thus, the difference come to Rs. 2,64,21,740/- in the books of accounts and valuation report made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thorities. 9. At the outset, Ld. Sr. DR reiterated the facts of the case and submitted that the assessee in the present case had objected to the valuation of commercial building including furniture, fixture and other interior work done by the registered valuer during Search & Seizure Action by the department. In order to meet out the requirement of law considering the objections of the assessee, the matter was referred to DVO, however, before receipt of the DVO's report, the assessment u/s 153A was completed on 26.09.2022, by the Ld. AO on the basis of valuation done by the registered valuer and an addition of Rs. 6,66,22,641/- was made, being the difference in value worked out by the registered valuer as compared to the cost of subject as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same is highly arbitrary and have no legal or other basis, however, there was no whisper about any corroborative support to substantiate that the report of DVO was arbitrary or unreasonable. Regarding, assessee's reference to 1st proviso of section 56(2)(vii) r.w.s. 50C and its applicability in the present case, nothing has been submitted before us to support such claim, in terms of corroborative evidence, also apparently no such claim was made before the Ld. AO while seeking rectification u/s 154, therefore, we are unable to consider and to persuade with such contention of the assessee under the grounds of appeal in the present case. As described by the Ld. CIT(A), the allegations by the assessee are only averments with no cogent docum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
