SHRI KUMAR LALJI MALHOTRA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD

Confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,01,66,674/- being the alleged difference between the jantri value/Stamp duty value and the value taken in the sale deed executed in respect of a plot of land lying and situated at Ranip Village, Survey No. 256 paiki Khata No. 374 admeasuring about 3025 sq. yard is the matter before us.

Before the First Appellate Authority the assessee contended that the Ld. AO has not followed the provision of Section 50C(2) as he has already objected the Jantri Value and sought for reference to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) for actual market value of the plot in question. Hence, valuation report under Section 50C of the Act was sought for by the Ld. CIT(A) and the same dated 23.01.2017 as received by the Ld. CIT(A) was forwarded to the Ld. AO for submitting the Remand Report on 06.02.2017. The Remand Report alongwith the Valuation Report of the DVO was sent to the appellant by and under the letter dated 07.02.2017 through registered post with a direction upon him to file reply within two weeks. On 15.02.2017 the appellant filed an application seeking for adjournment of two weeks to file the said reply and accordingly, the case was fixed on 28.02.2017. The appellant again made a request for adjournment for two weeks on 28.02.2017 which was found to be frivolous by the Ld. CIT(A) and decided the issue on the basis of the material available before him by calculating deemed value of capital gain at Rs. 98,15,776/- being the difference in the DVO’s valuation and the sale deed declared by the appellant. Hence, the instant appeal before us.

At the time of call the Ld. Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the chronological events of fixing matter for hearing and not granting adjournment in terms of the prayers made by the assessee seeking for an opportunity to file reply to the Remand Report and the DVO’s

The Ld. DR has not been able to controvert such contention made by the assessee before us.

Having heard the Ld. Representatives appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we find it fit and proper to extend another opportunity of being heard to the assessee and therefore, we remit the issue to the file of the Ld. AO to determine the issue in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence already on record or any other evidence which the assessee may rely upon at the time of hearing of the matter. We also make clear that the assessee will not seek any unnecessary adjournment before the Ld. AO during the assessment proceeding.

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 11/01/2022 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 11/01/2022 TRUE COPY TANMAY, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent.