2006 (7) TMI 157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st of the construction falls within the assessment years 1996-97 to 1999-2000. The total investment declared by the assessee for the above assessment years was Rs. 90,17,190/-. The Assessing Officer, of course, before completing the scrutiny assessment for the said assessment years, referred the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer. But, however, before receiving the valuation report, he completed the assessment. Thereafter, the Departmental Valuation Officer estimated the cost of construction at Rs. 1,23,46,000/-. After allowing certain deductions from the estimate made by the Valuation Officer, the Assessing Officer reduced the cost of construction at Rs. 1,08,51,700/-. Accordingly, based on the above difference in the cost of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2, 2004, aggrieved by which, the assessee again preferred appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal, by a common order dated October 28, 2005, allowed the appeals and hence, the present appeals by the Revenue raising the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Tribunal is right in holding that the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act on the basis of the valuation report is not proper? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Tribunal is right in holding that the addition on account of cost of construction as per the report of the Valuation Officer is....