Income Tax Officer, Hardoi V. M/s Radhey Krishna Automobiles, Hardoi

ITA 285/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83337 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K DEY
• Assessee Lawyers: MUNNA LAL AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Valuation report

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 285/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 - 06 INCOME TAX OFFICER HARDOI V. M/S RADHEY KRISHNA AUTOMOBILES LUCKNOW ROAD, HARDOI PAN: AAIPR2663A (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. P. K. DEY, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. MUNNA LAL AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING: 04 09 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 0 9 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KU MAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON A SOLITARY GROUND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF CONSIDERING THE REPORT OF T HE DEPARTMENTAL VALUATION OFFICER (DVO) AT RS.10,92,108/ - AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE AUTHORIZED VALUER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 2 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING O F THE APPEAL, OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT BEFORE MAKING REFERENCE TO THE DVO, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, REFERENCE MADE TO THE DVO IS NOT VALID I N THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF SARGAM CINEMA VS. CIT, 328 ITR 513 (SC). THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE ISSUE IS PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : SQUARELY COVERED BY THE AFORESAID JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COU RT, NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 3 . THE LD. D.R., HOWEVER, HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2 . HAVING GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THAT UNDISPUTEDLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE A REFERENCE TO THE DVO WITHOUT REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF SARGAM CINEMA VS. CIT ( SUPRA), WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION HAVING OBSERVED THAT REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THE DVO WITHOUT REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS NOT VALID AND THEREFORE NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 3 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT I ONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH SEPTEMBER , 2014 JJ: 0409 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )