COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. MEENA DEVI MANSIGHKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals pertain to the asst. yrs. 1995 -96, 1996 -97 and 1998 -99 relating to the same assessee and have been filed against the common order dt. 19th Aug., 2005 made by the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in the batch of appeals involving common issues.

(2.) WHILE dealing with the assessment proceedings for the year 1997 -98, the AO noticed that a house construction at Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara was completed by the assessee in the financial year 1997 -98; the assessee declared total cost of construction at Rs. 8,00,000 whereas according to the Departmental Valuation Officer's (DVO) report its cost was Rs. 18,13,100. On the basis of DVO's report, the AO added Rs. 1,94,972 in the asst. yr. 1997 -98 and initiated proceedings under Section 147/148 of the IT Act for the asst. yrs. 1995 -96, 1996 -97 and 1998 -99 wherein the assessment order had already been completed.

(3.) DURING the course of submissions, it is noticed that the said decision of the Tribunal in Smt. Sohan Devi Sodhani case (supra) has since been affirmed by a Division Bench of this Court in IT Appeal No. 130 of 2005. We have requisitioned the record of the said IT Appeal No. 130 of 2005 reported as CIT v. Smt. Sohan Devi Sodani (2006) 205 CTR (Raj) 466 -Ed. wherein this Court has held: