TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 1081
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The case was subsequently reopened by means of notice u/s 148 on the premise that a survey u/s 133A was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 28.03.2012 and certain impounded documents revealed that the assessee, along with his wife Smt. Nirmala Devi, had purchased land measuring 43 Kanals 2 marlas on which a hotel was constructed. The Assessing Officer referred the matter of determination of the value of construction of this hotel/banquet to the DVO. As per the DVO's report dated July, 2013, the assessee spent a sum of Rs. 5,15,578/-on construction of this hotel during the year under consideration, that is Financial year 2007-08. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 5,15,578/-, which came to be sustained in the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... against his estimate of cost of construction at Rs. 5.15 lac for the year, which is less than 10%. The Hon'ble J & K High Court in Honest Group of Hotel (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 177 CTR J&K) 232, has held that difference upto 10% in the DVO's report and the amount shown by the assessee is liable to be ignored. In the facts of the instant case, it is seen that the overall difference between the investment declared by the assessee at Rs. 3.65 crore and as estimated by the DVO at Rs. 3.97 crore is less than 10% of the DVO's estimate. As such, no addition is called for. I order for the deletion of addition. 4. The second issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs. 4,40,865/-, being investment made in some agr....