TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (11) TMI 855
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t") for A.Y. 2010- 11. 2. The addition of Rs. 28,65,935/- on the basis of valuation report of District Valuation Officer (DVO) after reopening the case under Section 148 of the Act is the subject matter before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee during the course of hearing raised objection on the maintainability point of reopening of the case under Section 147 of the Act. On this aspect he has argued that the reopening of assessment was beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. In that view of the matter the reopening is not valid and liable to be quashed as also argued by him. His further argument is this that the reopening on the basis of the DVO's report is not justified on this aspect he has cited ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent was reopened under Section 147 of the Act by issuing notice under Section 148 on 26.03.2017 after recording the following reasons upon taking necessary approval under Section 151(1) of the Act:- "Reasons for the belief that the income has escaped assessment for re-opening the case u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this case, the assessee derives income from the business of construction of residential flats/houses, filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2010-11 on 28/9/2010 declaring income of Rs. 4,29,270/-, Assessment as finalized u/s.143(3) on 15/3/2013 by accepting the return of income as assessed income of Rs. 4,29,270/-. 2. On verification of the Valuation Report, it is found that the District Valuation Officer has es....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave considered the submissions made by both the parties but we find that since the allegation of escapement of income is more than Rs. 1 lakh, the reopening cannot be said to be invalid in view of the provision of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act. Thus, the ground of maintainability of the reassessment proceeding as raised by the assessee fails. 9. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us that on the basis of the DVO's report the reopening as made by the Revenue is not justified. On this aspect he has relied upon the respective judgment: Gujarat High Court Aavkar Infrastructure Company V.DCIT 67 Taxmann.com 39 ; 218 Taxmann 644 ; 290 CTR 413. Akshar Infrastructure (P) Ltd. V. ITO 79 Taxmann.com 239 ; 246 Taxman 35....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ACIT ITA No. 137/Agr/2012 11. As regards the aspect of reopening of assessment on DVO's report is concerned we conclude that where the AO completed assessment under Section 143(3) making certain addition in respect of unexplained investment he could not reopen the said assessment for enhancement of said addition merely on the basis of the report of the DVO. In this regard, we are enlightened by the ratio laid down in the matter decided by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Akshar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward-1(1) reported in (2017) 79 taxmann.com 239 (Gujarat). We have further considered the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Munir Ismail Voraji vs. ITO, reported in (2017) 82 taxmann.c....