Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal is against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2008-09. The primary issues revolve around the initiation and completion of assessment proceedings without proper notices, non-compliance with ITAT directions for DVO valuation under Section 50C, and lack of corresponding addition under Section 56(2)(vii).
Held
The tribunal observed that the DVO report has been pending for over 8 years, causing significant delay. The matter was restored to the AO to decide afresh after obtaining the DVO's valuation report, emphasizing that this decision does not reflect on the merits of the dispute.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment proceedings were valid without proper notices? Whether the AO complied with ITAT's directions regarding DVO valuation under Section 50C? Whether the addition under Section 50C is sustainable without a corresponding addition under Section 56(2)(vii)?
Sections Cited
143(3), 254, 144, 143(2), 148, 151, 50C, 56(2)(vii), 142(1), 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 419/JPR/2025
fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Ram Ji Lal Meena cuke The ITO Vs. FA-20, Siddharth Nagar, Malviya Nagar Ward -6 (1) Jaipur 302 017 Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AOOPL 6275 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : None jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 06/08/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 28/10/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[ for short CIT(A)] dated 10.03.2025 for the assessment year 2008-09 raising therein following grounds of appeal.
1. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating and completing the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3)/254/144(Set aside) without issuing a valid notice under Section 143(2)148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The absence of such notice vitiates the entire assessment proceedings, rendering the resultant order illegal and void ab initio, Further, the L.d. AO has not taken any sanction from the appropriate authority under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for issuing any notice. The action of the Ld. AO is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, and against the facts of the case. Relief may SHRI RAM JI LAL MEENA VS ITO, WARD 6 (1), JAIPUR please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction 2. Without prejudice to Ground of Appeal
No. 1. the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) has grossly erred in completing the assessment without complying with the explicit directions of the Hon'ble ITAT to obtain a valuation report from the District Valuation Officer (DVO) under Section 50C (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Despite the appellant's diligent compliance in providing all requisite information to both the DVO and the AO, no valuation was conducted. Instead, the AO arbitrarily adopted the Stamp Valuation Authority's figure without due consideration of the appellant's objections, thereby rendering the assessment procedurally defective and liable to be set aside
3. Without prejudice to the GOA No. 1 to 2, the Ld. AO's failure to adhere to the Hon'ble ITAT's explicit directions constitutes a deliberate act of non- compliance, amounting to contempt of the Hon'ble Bench's order. This willful defiance has resulted in repeated proceedings, causing undue harassment to the appellant. It is prayed that the Hon'ble Bench may impose suitable costs upon the Revenue for this contemptuous conduct.
4. Without prejudice to the GOA No. 1 to 3, that on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer ("Ld. AO") has growly erred in making an addition under Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") without making a corresponding addition under Section 56(2)(vii) in the hands of the buyer, thereby violating the principles of consistency, equality, and fairness in taxation. The Ld. AO has further failed to appreciate that the impugned addition under Section 50C is not sustainable without corresponding adjustment on the buyer's side under Section 56(2)(vii), which is contrary to established judicial precedents recognizing that both parties to a transaction must be assessed consistently.’’ 2.1 None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of the notice sent by the ITAT to last known address of the assessee. Hence, the Bench decides to dispose off the appeal of the assessee ex-parte by taking into consideration the written submission dated 23-06-2025 adduced by the ld. AR of the assessee.