sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
From the Courts »
 M/s A Daga Royal Arts vs. ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
 Gagan Infraenergy Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 PCIT vs. Chawla Interbild Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 All India Federation of Tax Practitioners vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Mangammal @ Thulasi vs. T.B. Raju (Supreme Court)
 Mahabir Industries vs. PCIT (Supreme Court)
  Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)

Income-tax Officer,Ward-23(2), New Delhi. Vs. Mrs. Rita Kalra, M-73,2nd Floor, Greater Kailash-II New Delhi.
December, 14th 2012
            DELHI BENCH `F': NEW DELHI


                          I.T.A. No.243/Del/2012
                          Assessment Year : 2007-08

Income-tax Officer,                         Mrs. Rita Kalra,
Ward-23(2), New Delhi.          Vs.         M-73, 2nd Floor,
                                            Greater Kailash-II
                                            New Delhi.
                                            PAN : AANPK4312N

  (Appellant)                               (Respondent)

                Appellant by : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR.
                Respondent by : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate.

                          Date of hearing      : 12-12-2012
                          Date of Pronouncement : 12-12-2012



      The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 12-10-2011

passed by the learned First Appellate Authority, New Delhi. The only

ground raised by the Revenue is that on the facts and in the circumstances of

the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account

of valuation of property and undisclosed investment to the tune of

Rs.13,36,181/-, made for purchase of the said property.
                                     2                   ITA No.243/Del/2012

2.    During hearing the learned Sr. DR Shri Rajesh Kumar supported the

assessment order and advanced his argument which is identical to the ground

raised.   The addition so made by the Assessing Officer was strongly

defended by observing that it is a known fact that the market rate of the

property is always higher than which is shown, at the lesser rate, in the

registered document.   On the other hand, Shri Kapil Goel, the learned

counsel for the assessee strongly defended the impugned order by submitting

that the AO has not brought on record any evidence proving that any

underhand dealing was done by the assessee or to prove that any money was

paid over and above the recorded amount in the sale deed.

3.    We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material

available on record.     The facts in brief are that the assessee jointly

purchased property situated at 2nd Floor (M-73), Greater Kailash-II, New

Delhi for Rs.12,75,000/- (half share each). As per the Revenue the declared

value of the property was towards lower side, consequently, the transaction

was referred to the Valuation Officer to find out the value/investment. The

Valuation Officer opined the value at Rs.26,11,181/- vide letter dated 8-12-

2009. The Valuation Report was provided to the assessee to file objection.

The assessee vide communication dated 18th December, 2009 filed

objections which have been reproduced in Para 3.1 onwards of the
                                     3                   ITA No.243/Del/2012

assessment order. Thereafter, the objections of the assessee were forwarded

to the Valuation Officer. The comments of the Valuation Officer are also

reproduced in Para 3.1 of the assessment order, therefore, are not being

repeated being matter of record. Finally the amount of Rs.13,36,181/- was

added under sec. 69B read with sec. 142A of the Act.

3.1   On appeal, the learned CIT(A) examined the rival submissions, placed

reliance upon judicial pronouncement and deleted the addition which is

under challenge before this Tribunal. We find that the learned CIT(A) while

adjudicating the appeal of the assessee has duly considered the written

submissions of the assessee and the Valuation Report of the Departmental

Valuer. The building was constructed during the period from 1980 to 1989.

The construction was unauthorized and at the time of purchase in May 2006,

there was demolition drive by the MCD. The Valuation Officer compared

the purchase price of the property with the auction price of Rs.81,025/-

against the market value of Rs.34,100/- per sq. mtr. As per the scheduled

market rate, issued by the Ministry of Urban Affairs, Department of Urban

Development (Land Division) dated 16.04.1999, the market rate of the land

were Rs.9,240/- per sq. mtr. for the period from 1.04.1998 to 31st March,

2000. After applying the cost of inflation index cost the value in 2006

comes to Rs.12,328/- per sq. mtr.        The copy of the notification dated
                                        4                  ITA No.243/Del/2012

18.07.2006 of circle rates was also considered by the learned CIT(A). We

further find that at any stage no evidence was brought on record by the

Department either proving that any underhand exchange of money was done

while purchasing the property or any money beyond the amount declared in

the sale-deed effected between the parties.       The decision from Hon'ble

Apex Court in the case of K.P. Varghese, 131 ITR 597, from jurisdictional

High Court in Bajrang Lal Bansal, 335 ITR 572 and Suraj Devi, 320 ITR

604 along with the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Aneeta Singh (ITA

No.4324/Del/2009, order dated 30.08.2011) wherein it was held that in the

absence of any material showing that investment made in the property was

in excess of the stated amount in the title deed then sec.69B has no

application have already been considered in the impugned order. Under

these facts we find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn in the impugned


4.       Finally the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

5.       This order was pronounced in the Open Court in the presence of the

learned representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on

12th December, 2012.

              Sd/-                                    Sd/-
       ( B.C. MEENA)                           (JOGINDER SINGH)
     ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                         JUDICIAL MEMBER
                                   5                 ITA No.243/Del/2012

Dated: 12th December, 2012.

Copy of the order forwarded to:-
  1. Appellant
  2. Respondent
  3. CIT
  4. CIT(A)
  5. DR                                 By Order

*mg                                Deputy Registrar, ITAT.
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Software Reengineering Software Re-engineering Software Reverse Engineering Software Reverse Development Software Change Modulation Software Conversion Software Re-creation Software Re-development

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions