2015 (5) TMI 83

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g common questions of law and facts. However, to dictate orders, facts have been taken from ITA No.212 of 2013, pertaining to the assessment year 2004-05. 2. The Revenue is aggrieved against the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench (for short, the 'Tribunal') passed in ITA No.468 (Asr)/2012 dated 19.03.2013 (Annexure A-3) vide which, it set aside the re-assessment proceedings, on the ground that without rejecting the books of account of the assessee and by making reference to only the report of the Departmental Valuation Officer (for short, the 'DVO'), the action of the Assessing Authority to make the addition was not justified and thus, allowed the appeals of the assessee. The substantial questio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....clusion that the income had escaped assessment. While filing the return on 14.11.2011, in pursuance of the notice, the assessee took the objection that account books were regularly maintained with all details of bills/vouchers and the report of the DVO had already been challenged in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, the 'CIT'). The said appeal had been disposed of with a direction to dispose of the objection of the assessee after giving an opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the difference in the valuation was determined at Rs. 3,79,248/-, for the period 2003-04, relevant to the assessment year 2004-05. Similar additions were also made for the subsequent years and the total difference was Rs. 73....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Revenue has sought to place reliance upon the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Bharathi Cement Corporation (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & others [2013] 356 ITR 74 to submit that the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sargam Cinema (supra) had been considered in the order of the Tribunal and not applied in favour of the assessee. 7. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, supported the reasoning given by the Tribunal and submitted that the assessee was maintaining books of account and in the absence of any rejection, the matter could not have been referred to the DVO and it was a settled principle before this Court. 8. After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the above ques....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome to a similar conclusion that without rejecting the books of account, the matter should not be referred to the DVO. Relevant observation reads as under: "13. Section 142A of the Act has been incorporated primarily for verification of the value of any investment in respect of cases enumerated therein. The Assessing Officer would not be justified in invoking the aforesaid provision in every case and in a routine manner. Where the assessee maintains regular books of account for the purpose of construction of the asset and produces the vouchers, it would not be appropriate for the Assessing Officer to refer the matter to the DVO without first rejecting the books of account by prima facie concluding that the valuation appears to be more th....