2025 (7) TMI 1482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 41,00,208/- on account of alleged difference in value adopted by the assessee and market value of the property as per stamp duty valuation and u/s.56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 49,79,200/- on account of no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ess than the stamp duty valuation of Rs. 67,85,875/-. Though the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 54B of the Act, he had not declared any income u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. The AO accordingly added the difference of Rs. 41,00,208/- u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act, since the assessee did not file any compliance to the show cause notice. The AO also added LTCG of Rs. 76,64,867/- without allowing any deduction u/s 54B of the Act. Total income was determined at Rs. 1,19,64,510/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A), who has allowed deduction u/s 54B of the Act to extent of Rs. 26,85,667/- being the actual purchase consideration paid by the assessee. He, however, upheld the addition of Rs. 41,00,208/-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....after in accordance with law. 7. On the issue of additional ground, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue stated that the issue was not raised before the AO or CIT(A). 8. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. In the paper book, the appellant has filed copies of assessee's written submission to the CIT(A), separate request to CIT(A) for reference to DVO and copy of e-proceedings response acknowledgment wherein such request was made. It is seen from the submission made by the appellant before the CIT(A) that he had requested to refer the subject matter to the DVO as appellant was not given opportunity for referring the matter to DVO. This is at page 6 of the paper....