M/S. RAJESH AUTO MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1054/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 September 2025AY 2021-2022Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the addition under Section 56(2)(x) was indeed made without a DVO report. It restored the matter to the file of the AO with a direction to conduct a de novo assessment, obtain a valuation report from the DVO, and provide the assessee a fresh opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an addition of ₹5,03,71,311/- made by the AO under Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, which was affirmed by the CIT(A). The core contention was that this addition for property valuation was made without referring the issue to the District Valuation Officer (DVO).

What were the issues?

Whether an addition under Section 56(2)(x) related to property valuation can be made by the Assessing Officer without referring the matter to the District Valuation Officer for a valuation report.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(x)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri S Jhajharia, AR
For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Hearing: 10.09.2025Pronounced: 15.09.2025

O R D E R

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27, (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 19.03.2025 for the AY 2021-22.

2.

The assessee has challenged the order of ld. CIT (A) affirming the addition of ₹5,03,71,311/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 56(2)(x) of the Act without referring the issue to the District Valuation Officer (DVO).

3.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the addition made by the ld. AO without referring the issue to the DVO for valuation of the property and the addition was made u/s 56(2)(X) of the Act, which is wrong and against the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, the ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15.09.2025.

More judgments on Section 56(2)(x)

All 565 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(x) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →