TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 213
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the return of income which was taken in scrutiny by the Assessing Officer. Order of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) was passed on 31.12.2010. During the period relevant to assessment year 2008-09, the petitioner had purchased a bungalow at 'Satyagrah Chhavni', Ahmedabad, on 25.07.2007 for a sale consideration of Rs. 60 lakhs. It appears that while registering the sale deed, the stamp duty authorities of the State Government had demanded and assessee had paid an additional stamp duty of Rs. 1,34,256/for the said sale. In the order of assessment, the Assessing Officer made no addition on the premise that the assessee had invested amount larger than the reflected sale conside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as paid additional stamp duty of Rs. 1,34,256/to the subregistrarPaldi, Ahmedabad over and above the stamp duty paid on Rs. 60 lacs which means the assessee had made an unaccounted investment in the purchase of property. As such, the sale value of the property was undervalued by both purchaser and seller. Therefore, the then A.O. was in possession of evidence to the effect that investment in property was not correctly reported by the assessee. Moreover, due to lake of time being a time barring assessment, the reference was made u/s. 142A to the valuation cell on 29/12/2010 for determining the fair market value of the property in question. On the basis of the above reference, the valuation cell has submitted the report on 16/7/2012 determ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld by the Division Bench of this Court in judgment dated 20.10.2016 in Special Civil Application No.6203 of 2011, in which, this assessee had challenged the reference to the valuer. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel Ms.Mauna Bhatt for the Revenue opposed the petition contending that the notice for reopening has been issued within a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. The question of actual investment made by the assessee in purchase of the said property was not examined by the Assessing Officer in the original assessment. Even if the reference to the DVO was invalid, report can be relied upon for the purpose of reopening of the assessment. In this context, she relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to be challenged by the assessee in Special Civil Application No.6203 of 2011. The Division Bench by the judgment dated 20.10.2016, concluded as under: "13. Upon considering the materials on records and the contentions raised by respective parties and in view of the aforesaid proposition of law laid down by the cases which have been referred, we are of the opinion that the action of making reference is not sustainable in the eye of law and therefore, we hereby quash and set aside the communication dated 29.12.2010 as also the consequent communication dated 10.3.2011 and 26.4.2011 respectively. The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute." 10. Thus, the very reference to the DVO was held to be invalid. We are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iginal assessment had found that the assessee had purchased the said bungalow at 'Satyagrah Chhavni' for a consideration of Rs. 60 lakhs. He was however of the opinion that the declared sale consideration was on the lower side. Upon obtaining a copy of the sale deed the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had paid an additional stamp duty of Rs. 1,34,256/for registration of sale deed which means that the assessee had made an unaccounted investment in purchase of the property. 12. For two reasons, this information would not permit the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment. Firstly, there is no presumption in law that whenever the Stamp Duty authority collects duty higher than what would be payable on the declared sale c....