2014 (8) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Id.Assessing Officer was right in making addition on the basis of CPWD valuation as against PWD valuation provided by the appellant ? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id.Assessing Officer was right in making addition in the absence of exercise of discretion u/s.69B as mandated ?" 2. During the course of Survey under Section 133-A on 25.03.1999, it was found that the assessee had constructed two houses at A.S.S.S.Road, Virudhunagar. The assessee admitted the cost of construction at Rs. 8,94,868/-. In order to find out the correct cost of construction, the case was selected for scrutiny. It was found that the assessee had not maintained necessary vouchers in support of the account entries. Thus, to ascerta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....missioner of Income Tax (Appeals) thought fit to give a reduction of 20% from the rates adopted by the Valuation Officer to arrive at the probable cost at Rs. 11,97,987/-. Thus, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) adopted the cost of construction and directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the unexplained investment accordingly. 5. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee went before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, so too, the Revenue. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and hence, the present appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the assessee placed before us the PWD rates as applicable to Virudhunagar and Ramanadhapuram Districts and pointed out that the the account figu....