TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (12) TMI 318
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of Smt. Amiya Bala Paul v. CIT [2003] 130 Taxman 511 wherein it has been held that reference made by Assessing Officer for determining the cost of construction was without jurisdiction as none of the provisions authorized the Assessing Officer to make such reference. Consequently, it was held that no addition could be made on the basis of such report. This contention of assessee's Counsel was seriously objected by the ld. DR by submitting that the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court has been nullified by the retrospective insertion of new section 142A w.e.f.15-11-1972. Hence, all references have become legal. In view of the same, it is contended that appeal of revenue cannot be dismissed on the legal contention raised by the ld. Counsel for assessee. 3. Faced with such situation, the ld. Counsel for assessee has contended that in view of the proviso to newly inserted section 142A, the objection of ld. DR is devoid of force. He drew our attention to coma after the figure '2004' and before the word 'and' to contend that it is disjunctive and therefore this proviso is applicable to those cases (i) where assessments were made on or before the 30th September, 2004; and (ii) where su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ewellery or other valuable article referred to in section 69A or section 69B is required to be made, the Assessing Officer may require the Valuation Officer to make an estimate of such value and report the same to him. (2) The Valuation Officer to whom a reference is made under subsection (1) shall, for the purposes of dealing with such reference, have all the powers that he has under section 38A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957). (3) on receipt of the report from the Valuation Officer, the Assessing Officer may, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard, take into account such report in making such assessment or reassessment: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply in respect of an assessment made on or before the 30th day of September, 2004, and where such assessment has become final and conclusive on or before that date, except in cases where a reassessment is required to be made in accordance with the provisions of section 153A." 6. The above section has been brought on the statute book retrospectively in order to nullify the effect of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Amiya Bala Paul wherein it has be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd not to frustrate it. 9. The entire emphasis of the ld. Counsel for assessee is on the use of coma after the figure 2004 and before the word 'and', in the said proviso. According to him, the use of coma is disjunctive and, therefore, not only the concluded assessments are excluded but also the assessments which are pending before the higher forum. Reliance has also been placed on certain judgments to support his contention. There is no dispute to the legal proposition canvassed by him that plain and natural meaning should be given to the language used by the Legislature but it is also the settled rule of interpretation that no construction can render the provisions of Statute as redundant. If literal construction results in absurdity, then, such construction must be avoided and the provisions should be constred in the manner which would advance the object for enacting such provision. Reference can be made to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. J.H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 wherein it has been held:- "If a strict and literal construction of the statute leads to an absurd result, i.e. a result not intended to be subserved by the object of the legislati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....year Investment 1992-93 9,12,816 1993-94 22,82,087 1994-95 10,04,410 Not satisfied with such declaration, the Assessing Officer made reference to the Valuation Officer for determining the cost of construction, who determined the same, after applying CPWD rates of 1976 at Rs. 62,63,226. He also valued the extra fittings at Rs. 2,94,774. This total value was taken at Rs. 65,58,000. The Assessing Officer accepting the valuation report, bifurcated the cost of construction as under: Financial Year Investment 1992-93 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of CPWD for 1976 with indexation were wrongly applied by DVO when revised rates for 1992 were available. All findings of CIT(A) remains uncontroverted. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) is upheld on this issue. 14. The next issue relates to the deletion of addition of Rs. 3 lakhs made by Assessing Officer under section 68. One of the partners Shri H.C. Bhatia had introduced the sum of Rs. 9.5 lakhs in his capital account out of which the Assessing Officer was satisfied with the sum of Rs. 6.5 lakhs. However, he made addition of Rs. 3 lakhs in respect of two sums of Rs. 1.5 lakhs each credited on30-12-1993and17-11-1993as he could not produce the bank pass book. The CIT(A) deleted the addition by observing as under: "I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case and in my opinion the addition is not justified. Firstly, Shri H.C. Bhatia is not a new person but is a partner of the firm. Secondly, he has been regularly introducing money in his account. In the previous year he introduced Rs. 11 lakhs. In the present year he introduced Rs. 9.50 lakhs. Thirdly, all the money has been brought in either by cheque or DD. Fourthly, Mr. H.C. Bhatia has confirmed the transacti....