2024 (9) TMI 364

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the CITA erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 30,17,500/- u/s 56(2)(vii) of the Act. B. On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in Law, the AO and CIT(A) failed to appreciate that: 1. The CITA passed the order ignoring the assessee request to refer the matter to Valuation Officer (DVO) for a fair valuation without giving any justification. ii. The difference in purchase value vis-à-vis stamp duty valuation was on account of niche and passage area being included in area in the agreement which should have been excluded from stamp duty valuation. iii. The assessee has paid for usable area on 523.70 sq ft area only out of total area of 783.40 sq ft, differential area being Passage area 185....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l usable carpet area for a consideration of Rs. 1.70 crores. It was pointed out that the stamp duty value of Rs. 2,00,17,500/- is calculated at 783.4 sq ft which includes non-usable area of passage and areas of niche. It was strongly contended that the passage and niche are not usable for office purpose therefore the stamp duty valuation should be reduced proportionately. The reply of the assessee did not find any favour with the AO who completed the assessment by making addition of Rs. 30,17,500/- being the difference in value of property and treated as income u/s 56(2)(vii) of the Act. 6. The assessee agitated the matter before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success. 7. Before us the counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been....