COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. ASHOK KHETRAPAL
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE issue involved in the present appeal is regarding deletion of an addition totaling Rs. 2,23,08,152/- made on the basis of the report of
valuation cell of department of Revenue on account of unexplained
investment in the properties of the assessed.
(2.) ON 17th November, 2000, a search and seizure operation under Section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short as 'Act') was conducted in the case of M/s. Pashupatinath Jee Tours and Travels at its business and
residential premises of its partners and their relatives. The assessed is
a partner of this firm and during the course of search of his residence
B-174, East of Kailash, New Delhi, some papers of properties in which
assessed had made investments were found. The Assessing Officer made a
reference to the Valuation Officer and treated the difference between the
valuation as per Departmental Valuation Officer's report and the declared
value of the properties as assessed's undisclosed income for the
assessment year 1999-2000 and the period 1st April, 2000 to 17th
In appeal, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [CIT (A)] deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer holding that no adverse material
was found during the course of search to suggest that the assessed had
understated the investment in the properties.
(3.) THE Revenue challenged the order of [CIT (A)] before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short as 'Tribunal') and vide its impugned order
dated 21st August, 2006, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal holding that
in the absence of any adverse material found during the course of search,
no addition can be made by treating the investment as undisclosed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.