TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bilaspur, (in short "Ld. AO"), u/s 154 r.w.s. 153A of the Act, dated 01.06.2022. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of case and in the law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the value of land and building as per the valuation of Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) which valuation is higher than the stamp duty value of the property at which it has been actually purchased by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that in the view of clear mandate of 1st proviso to section 56(2)(vii) r.w.s 50C, valuation by DVO cannot exceed the stamp duty valuation of property and accordingly when the value of property rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment following additions were made: A.Y. Section Returned Income (Rs.) Addition made (Rs.) Assessed Income (Rs.) 2014-15 153A/143(3) 10550219 -- 10550219 2015-16 153A/143(3) 9969473 -- 9969473 2016-17 153A/143(3) 14338942 66622641 80961583 2017-18 153A/143(3) 23277940 3000000 26277940 2018-19 153A/143(3) 17262709 10301340 27564049 2019-20 153A/143(3) 17738846 20840764 38579610 2020-21 143(3) 21172040 24228448 45400488 3.1 In the aforesaid additions, an addition of Rs. 6,66,22,641/- was made in the AY 2016-17 regarding the valuation of cost of construction of commercial building on a land measuring 5352 Square Feet s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and building was 6,43,00,000/-, accordingly, the addition was supposed to be made, following the valuation report of DVO has been arrived at to Rs. 2,64,21,740/- (Rs.9,07,21,740- Rs. 6,43,00,0000). 5. In backdrop of the valuation done by the DVO, an application for rectification of error u/s 154 of the Act was made by the assessee. Taking cognizance of the said application by the assessee, Ld. AO passed an order u/s 154 by scaling down the original addition made in the assessment order for Rs. 6,66,22,641/- to Rs. 2,64,21,740/- and the revised income of assessee was calculated at Rs. 4,07,60,682/- for the AY 2016-17. 6. Aggrieved with the aforesaid rectification order u/s 154, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), howev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... grounds No. (i) & (ii) is dismissed. 7. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 8. At the threshold of the hearing, it is noticed that the present case was fixed for hearing on 10.01.2025, but Ld. Counsel of the assessee had filed an application seeking adjournment of the matter to prepare and file the paper book. The matter, therefore, was adjourned to 14.01.2025. However, there was no representation on behalf of the assessee on the next date of hearing i.e., 14.01.2025, also no application requesting for adjournment has been placed before us. Under such circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to take up the matter for hearing and to dispose of the appeal as per Rul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. CIT(A) challenging the issue that the value adopted by DVO cannot be the basis for Assessment, as the valuation is more than the stamp duty value of the property. Ld. CIT(A) had dealt with the issue on merits, discussing facts involved therein and has very justifiably concluded that the modified addition after reduction of the same vide order u/s 154 by the Ld. AO, contemplating upon the issue that the report of DVO is a valid and reasonable report than the report of registered valuer. There is no further explanation on behalf of the assessee on the issue, therefore, the decision of Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be sustained. 10. We have considered the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR, perused the orders of revenue authorities and contentions raise....