COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI Vs. PUNEET SABHARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal was admitted on the following two questions of law:-

(2.) THE facts leading to the framing of the aforesaid questions, in brief, are as follows.

(3.) THE Assessing Officer was of the view that cost of acquisition of the aforesaid property as shown in the sale deed was much lower than the fair market value of these properties. Because of this doubt in the mind of the Assessing Officer, he referred the matter to the Valuation Cell of the Department for determining the cost of aforesaid properties on the date of acquisition. The District Valuation Officer (DVO) submitted his report as per which the value was higher by an amount of Rs. 12,54,206/- in respect of the aforesaid three properties. After following the requisite procedure laid down under the Act for issuance of show cause notice etc., the Assessing Officer made the additions in the income of the assessee while passing the assessment order by the aforesaid amount of Rs. 12.54 lacs. The assessee, not being satisfied with the aforesaid order preferred an appeal before the CIT (A). After considering the matter at length, the CIT (A) allowed the appeal and deleted the addition on the ground that apart from the said report of the DVO, there was no evidence on record that some extra consideration was paid by the assessee for acquiring the property over and above the consideration stated in the sale deeds. The CIT (A) in support of this conclusion relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of K.P. Verghese v. ITO, 131 ITR 597. He was also of the view that the condition precedent for invoking the provisions of Section 69B of the Act was not fulfilled.