Sargam Cinema v. CIT

328 ITR 513Supreme Court of India2010#561 most cited

What is Sargam Cinema v. CIT authority for?

For an Assessing Officer to make a valid reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer for the estimation of the cost of construction, the books of accounts must first be rejected under Section 145(3) of the Income-tax Act.

172

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sargam Cinema · CIT v Sargam Cinema · Section 145(3) · Section 142A · DVO reference · cost of construction estimation · rejection of books of accounts · Assessing Officer powers · valuation · assessment procedure · 328 ITR 513

Also reported as

197 Taxmann 203

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 69BSection 292CSection 115BBESection 132(4)Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 142asection 131(1)(d)section 38surrender of incomesection 55asection 150mat creditsection 69baccumulated profitssection 158bdsection 131(1)retracted statement

Judgments citing Sargam Cinema v. CIT

Shri Hari Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1720/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member 1. Ita No.1719/Ahd/2019 & 2. Ita No.1720/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Shri Hari Corporation The Dy.Cit A/13, Vrundavan Park Society Vs Circle-3(1)2) Viratnagar Road, Odhav Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 382 415 Pan: Absfs 9846 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vijay H. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: Both The Captioned Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Dated 03/10/201 & 04/10/2019 For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since The Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay H. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR
Section 142Section 142ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 69Section 69ASection 69B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ “B”, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद । अहमदाबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER 1. ITA No.1719/Ahd/2019 & 2. ITA No.1720/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively) Shri Hari Corporation The Dy.CIT A/13, Vrundavan Park Society Vs Circle-3(1)2) Viratnagar Road, Odhav Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 382 415 PAN: ABSFS 9846 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellan…

Shri Hari Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1719/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member 1. Ita No.1719/Ahd/2019 & 2. Ita No.1720/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Shri Hari Corporation The Dy.Cit A/13, Vrundavan Park Society Vs Circle-3(1)2) Viratnagar Road, Odhav Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 382 415 Pan: Absfs 9846 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vijay H. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: Both The Captioned Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Dated 03/10/201 & 04/10/2019 For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since The Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay H. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR
Section 142Section 142ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 69Section 69ASection 69B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ “B”, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद । अहमदाबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER 1. ITA No.1719/Ahd/2019 & 2. ITA No.1720/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively) Shri Hari Corporation The Dy.CIT A/13, Vrundavan Park Society Vs Circle-3(1)2) Viratnagar Road, Odhav Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 382 415 PAN: ABSFS 9846 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellan…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Vishnu Apartments Pvt. Ltd

ITA/416/2022HC Delhi03 May 2024

Bench: Referring The Matter To The Departmental Valuation Officer ('Dvo') For The Purpose Of Determination Of The Cost Of Construction? B. Whether The Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Has Erred In Following The Decision Rendered By The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Sargam Cinema Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax [328 Itr 513 (Sc)] Without Appreciating The Insertion Of Section 142A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Introduced Vide Finance Act, 2004? C. Whether The Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Has Erred In Not Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.90,50,894, Relatable To The Cost Of Construction Of The Project Basis The Dvo Report On The Premise That The Difference Between The Value Declared By The Respondent/Assessee & The Dvo Is Less Than 3% & Therefore This Is A Digitally Signed Order. The Authenticity Of The Order Can Be Re-Verified From Delhi High Court Order Portal By Scanning The Qr Code Shown Above. The Order Is Downloaded From The Dhc Server On 08/05/2024 At 12:41:44

Section 142A

…O') for the purpose of determination of the cost of Construction? B. Whether the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in following the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [328 ITR 513 (SC)] without appreciating the insertion of Section 142A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 introduced vide Finance Act, 2004? C. Whether the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in not sustaining the addition of Rs.90,50,894, relatable to the cost of construction of the project basis the DVO Report on the premise that the difference b…

The DCIT(Central)-I, Bhopal vs. M/S. Shriniwas Education Society, Bhopal

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 13/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.02 & 13/Ind/2017(Ays: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Shriniwas Education बनाम/ Income-Tax, Society, Vs. (Central)-I, E-5, 3Rd Floor, Bhopal Tawa Complex, Bittan Market, Bhopal (Pan:Aaaas 7060 B) (Appellant/Revenue) (Respondent/Assessee)

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 132Section 153ASection 69B

…ve make such a reference without finding any defect in books of account and without rejecting books of account. In accepting this, Ld. CIT(A) relied upon several judicial rulings including the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Sargam Cinema Vs. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC). Ld. AR submitted that the same view has also been taken by ITAT, Indore in assessee’s own case for AY 2013-14 & 2014-15 in ITA No. 479 & 480/Ind/2018, order dated 15.12.2023. Therefore, Ld. AR contended that this issue is already settled in favour of assessee by Hon’ble Apex Court as followed by ITAT, Indore in assessee’s own case and t…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Usha Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3862/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the Distt. Valuation Officer. d) The AO has no powers under the Act to resort to estimation of Fair Market Value without rejecting the books of accounts, as held in the case of Sargam Cinema V. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513(SC). 8.4. With regard to addition made by AO citing wrong section 69 the ld. A.R. submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has duly accounted for the cheque portion of the purchase consideration of the property in the books of accounts in so far as the addition made in respect of purchase transactions is concerned. In such circum…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3860/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the Distt. Valuation Officer. d) The AO has no powers under the Act to resort to estimation of Fair Market Value without rejecting the books of accounts, as held in the case of Sargam Cinema V. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513(SC). 8.4. With regard to addition made by AO citing wrong section 69 the ld. A.R. submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has duly accounted for the cheque portion of the purchase consideration of the property in the books of accounts in so far as the addition made in respect of purchase transactions is concerned. In such circum…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3859/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the Distt. Valuation Officer. d) The AO has no powers under the Act to resort to estimation of Fair Market Value without rejecting the books of accounts, as held in the case of Sargam Cinema V. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513(SC). 8.4. With regard to addition made by AO citing wrong section 69 the ld. A.R. submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has duly accounted for the cheque portion of the purchase consideration of the property in the books of accounts in so far as the addition made in respect of purchase transactions is concerned. In such circum…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3858/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the Distt. Valuation Officer. d) The AO has no powers under the Act to resort to estimation of Fair Market Value without rejecting the books of accounts, as held in the case of Sargam Cinema V. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513(SC). 8.4. With regard to addition made by AO citing wrong section 69 the ld. A.R. submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has duly accounted for the cheque portion of the purchase consideration of the property in the books of accounts in so far as the addition made in respect of purchase transactions is concerned. In such circum…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Anju Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3831/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the Distt. Valuation Officer. d) The AO has no powers under the Act to resort to estimation of Fair Market Value without rejecting the books of accounts, as held in the case of Sargam Cinema V. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513(SC). 8.4. With regard to addition made by AO citing wrong section 69 the ld. A.R. submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has duly accounted for the cheque portion of the purchase consideration of the property in the books of accounts in so far as the addition made in respect of purchase transactions is concerned. In such circum…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Satya Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3826/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…be permissible to rely upon the valuation given by the Distt. Valuation Officer. d) The AO has no powers under the Act to resort to estimation of Fair Market Value without rejecting the books of accounts, as held in the case of Sargam Cinema V. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513(SC). 8.4. With regard to addition made by AO citing wrong section 69 the ld. A.R. submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has duly accounted for the cheque portion of the purchase consideration of the property in the books of accounts in so far as the addition made in respect of purchase transactions is concerned. In such circum…

The DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal vs. M/S. Shriniwas Education Society, Bhopal

ITA 480/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…nt of assessee and without rejecting those books of account. Ld. AR submitted that under the provisions of section 142A, existing at the relevant time, it was judicially held by several courts including Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sargam Cinema Vs. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC) that no reference u/s 142A to DVO could be made without rejecting books of account. Therefore, the reference made by AO to DVO is itself invalid and consequently the additions made by AO were also illegal. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted addition for this very reasoning, following the landmark decision of Hon’ble Suprem…

The DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal vs. M/S. Shriniwas Education Society, Bhopal

ITA 479/IND/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…nt of assessee and without rejecting those books of account. Ld. AR submitted that under the provisions of section 142A, existing at the relevant time, it was judicially held by several courts including Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sargam Cinema Vs. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC) that no reference u/s 142A to DVO could be made without rejecting books of account. Therefore, the reference made by AO to DVO is itself invalid and consequently the additions made by AO were also illegal. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted addition for this very reasoning, following the landmark decision of Hon’ble Suprem…

The DCIT(Central)-I, Bhopal vs. M/S. Ayushman Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal

ITA 478/IND/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…nt of assessee and without rejecting those books of account. Ld. AR submitted that under the provisions of section 142A, existing at the relevant time, it was judicially held by several courts including Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sargam Cinema Vs. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC) that no reference u/s 142A to DVO could be made without rejecting books of account. Therefore, the reference made by AO to DVO is itself invalid and consequently the additions made by AO were also illegal. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted addition for this very reasoning, following the landmark decision of Hon’ble Suprem…

The DCIT, (Central)-1, Bhopal vs. M/S. Ayushman Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal

ITA 477/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…nt of assessee and without rejecting those books of account. Ld. AR submitted that under the provisions of section 142A, existing at the relevant time, it was judicially held by several courts including Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sargam Cinema Vs. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC) that no reference u/s 142A to DVO could be made without rejecting books of account. Therefore, the reference made by AO to DVO is itself invalid and consequently the additions made by AO were also illegal. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted addition for this very reasoning, following the landmark decision of Hon’ble Suprem…

The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Gorakhpur vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 13/VNS/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VARANASI BENCH, VARANASI Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amit Shukla (JM) I.T.A. No. 351/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 271 122. Tax (OSD), Circle-1, Gorakhpur PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 13/VNS/2023 (A.Y. 2020-21) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 273 209. CPC, Bengaluru PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 448/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 217/ALLD/2017 (A.Y. 2014-15) Dy. Commissioner of Income…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Gorakhpur vs. The Mahabir Jute Mills Limited, Gorakhpur

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 217/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VARANASI BENCH, VARANASI Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amit Shukla (JM) I.T.A. No. 351/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 271 122. Tax (OSD), Circle-1, Gorakhpur PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 13/VNS/2023 (A.Y. 2020-21) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 273 209. CPC, Bengaluru PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 448/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 217/ALLD/2017 (A.Y. 2014-15) Dy. Commissioner of Income…

DCIT, Gorakhpur vs. M/S Mahabir Jite Mills, Ltd., Gorakhpur

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 448/ALLD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VARANASI BENCH, VARANASI Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amit Shukla (JM) I.T.A. No. 351/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 271 122. Tax (OSD), Circle-1, Gorakhpur PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 13/VNS/2023 (A.Y. 2020-21) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 273 209. CPC, Bengaluru PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 448/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 217/ALLD/2017 (A.Y. 2014-15) Dy. Commissioner of Income…

The Mahabir Jute Mills Limited, Gorakhpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Gorakhpur

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 351/ALLD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VARANASI BENCH, VARANASI Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amit Shukla (JM) I.T.A. No. 351/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 271 122. Tax (OSD), Circle-1, Gorakhpur PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 13/VNS/2023 (A.Y. 2020-21) The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd., Vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Sahjanwah, Gorakhpur 273 209. CPC, Bengaluru PAN : AAACT8708R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 448/ALLD/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 217/ALLD/2017 (A.Y. 2014-15) Dy. Commissioner of Income…

Kay Jay Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 2423/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri J.S. Minhas, CIT, DR
Section 131Section 153ASection 68

…VO must be preceded by rejection of books of account by the authority who is making the reference. Reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of the ITAs No.2421 to 2423/Del/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema vs. CIT, reported in 328 ITR 513 and in the case of CIT vs. Nirmal Kumar Aggarwal, reported in 259 Taxman 320 (SC). (c) In the instant case, the reference to DVO was made on 14.03.2016 by the ld. AO u/s 142A of the Act. Hence, in terms of section 142A(6) of the Act, the ld. DVO is duty-bound to furnish his valuation report on or before 30.09.2016. Admittedly, the DVO’s report wa…

Kay Jay Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 2422/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri J.S. Minhas, CIT, DR
Section 131Section 153ASection 68

…VO must be preceded by rejection of books of account by the authority who is making the reference. Reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of the ITAs No.2421 to 2423/Del/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema vs. CIT, reported in 328 ITR 513 and in the case of CIT vs. Nirmal Kumar Aggarwal, reported in 259 Taxman 320 (SC). (c) In the instant case, the reference to DVO was made on 14.03.2016 by the ld. AO u/s 142A of the Act. Hence, in terms of section 142A(6) of the Act, the ld. DVO is duty-bound to furnish his valuation report on or before 30.09.2016. Admittedly, the DVO’s report wa…