Tribunal Invalidates Reassessment, Emphasizes Valuer Report

The Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO, admitting the appeal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal found the reopening of assessment based on factually incorrect premises unsustainable in law, invalidating the adoption of deemed purchase consideration and the reference to the DVO valuation. Approval under Section 151 was deemed mechanical, and the Tribunal emphasized the importance of accepting the Government Approved Valuer's report in the absence of incriminating material. Other grounds challenging the reassessment and addition were not adjudicated, with the appeal allowed on 16th February 2022.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal.
2. Validity of reassessment proceedings under Section 147.
3. Adoption of deemed purchase consideration based on DVO valuation.
4. Approval under Section 151.
5. Reference to the valuation cell.
6. Merits of the addition made by the AO.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The assessee filed the appeal with a delay of 20 days, accompanied by a condonation application explaining the reasons for the delay. After reviewing the application and hearing both sides, the delay was condoned, and the appeal was admitted for hearing.

2. Validity of Reassessment Proceedings under Section 147:
The AO reopened the assessment on the grounds that the assessee purchased property worth Rs. 31,50,000, which was not verifiable from the return of income. The AO recorded reasons for reopening, stating that the assessee had not disclosed all material facts. However, it was found that the assessee had filed the original return of income on 31.10.2006, declaring an income of Rs. 10,87,058. The Tribunal noted that the reopening was based on incorrect facts, as the return had indeed been filed. Citing decisions from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings, stating that reopening based on factually incorrect premises is not sustainable in law.

3. Adoption of Deemed Purchase Consideration Based on DVO Valuation:
The AO adopted the land rate for the property at Rs. 50,214 per sq. mtr. based on the DVO's report, valuing the property at Rs. 1,02,57,600, resulting in an addition of Rs. 70,57,600. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, directing the adoption of the circle rate of Rs. 21,800 per sq. mtr. and allowing a deduction of 29.5% for defects in the location of the property. The assessee contended that the AO did not adhere to the CIT(A)'s directions and that the reference to the DVO was invalid without rejecting the books of account.

4. Approval under Section 151:
The approval under Section 151 for reopening the assessment was challenged as mechanical and without application of mind. The Tribunal, referring to various judicial decisions, noted that the approval was granted on non-existing facts, further supporting the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings.

5. Reference to the Valuation Cell:
The assessee argued that the reference to the DVO was illegal and unwarranted, as the AO did not reject the books of account or find any material to disbelieve the declared consideration. The Tribunal agreed, citing decisions from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, stating that reference to the DVO without rejecting the books of account is invalid.

6. Merits of the Addition Made by the AO:
The Tribunal noted that the assessee purchased the property for Rs. 31,50,000, evidenced by the registered sale deed. The AO's estimation based on the DVO's report was not supported by any adverse material. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider various defects in the DVO's report and the location-specific issues affecting the property's value. The Tribunal emphasized that the report of the Government Approved Valuer should be accepted in the absence of any incriminating material.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO and the subsequent proceedings, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. The various other grounds challenging the reopening of the assessment and the addition on merit were deemed academic and not adjudicated. The order was pronounced in the open court on 16th February 2022.

---