TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 683
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,17,00,260/- made by the AO on account of difference in cost of construction shown by the assessee and the valuation as per DVO report on the basis of his stands taken in the AY 2011-12 invalidating the action of the AO of referring the case for valuation u/s 142A of the IT. Act on the basis of non rejection of books of account before referring to DVO. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in invalidating the reference to DVO inspite of rejection of books of account in the assessment order which shall tantamount to rejection of books of account for the purpose of making reference to DVO. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... served on the assessee and the objection so filed by the assessee were disposed off by the Assessing Officer and the same is not under dispute before us. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has furnished a copy of valuation report. The AO on perusal of valuation Reports noted that the Registered Valuer has not pointed out any evidential observation to establish the basis of his valuation on the same hotel building at Rs. 16563300/- till 10.12.2010 as against valuation of Rs. 20351806/- made by the Departmental Valuation Officer after providing proper opportunity to the assessee firm and the measurement etc. have been taken in the presence of partners of the assessee firm. Therefore, considering the material fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....year under consideration, the AO has not rejected the books of accounts. Hon'ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in its order dated 14/06/2017 has already dealt with the issue in details and has come to the conclusion that the reference to the DVO during the year under consideration is subjected to the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema. In this regard, Hon'ble ITAT in the set aside order at para 5.2 had considered the decision taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and had reproduced the relevant part of the decision as under:- "In the present case, we find that the tribunal decided the matter rightly in favour of the assessee inasmuch as the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessing authority could not have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....difference in valuation of the Hotel building was deleted on account of the fact that reference to DVO was done without rejecting the books of accounts. It was submitted by the ld AR that facts of the present case are identical and basis the same valuation report which formed the basis for addition in AY 2011-12, the addition has been made for the impunged assessment year without rejection of the books of accounts and hence, the addition so made by the AO has been rightly deleted by the ld CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The Coordinate Bench (speaking through one of us) in assessee's own case in ITA No. 738/JP/15 dated 14.06.2017 for A.Y 2011-12 has analysed this very issue and....