H.L. KARWA, J.M. - (1.) THESE three appeals filed by the Revenue relate to the same assessee and common contentions have been raised therein. They were therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
(2.) In ITA No. 1341/Ahd/1991 relating to asst. yr. 1980-81 the Revenue has raised the following grounds : 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the addition on account of cost of construction is not justified and thus deleting the same. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the ITO to accept the return under V. D. Scheme. In ITA Nos-. 2939 & 2940/Ahd/1991 relating to asst. yrs. 1981~82 and 1982-83 the 'common ground of appeals is as follows : The learned Dy. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the AO to allow relief to the assessee as discussed in the appellate order No. CIT R. II/37311989-90 dt. 15th Nov., 1990 of the CIT( A) for asst. yr. 1980-81.
(3.) BRIEFLY, stated the facts of the cases are that during the course of assessment proceedings for asst. yr. 1982-83 it was noticed by the AO that the assessee had completed construction of property known as Jaynath Hall' at Gondal Road, Rajkot. During the course of assessment proceedings for asst. yr. 1982-83 reference was made to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) to determine the cost of the said property. The DVO vide his report dt. 17th March, 19B6 estimated the cost of construction at Rs. 7,57,700 as against Rs. 2,79,025 shown by the assessee. Consequently, the AO made an addition of Rs. 7,57,7002,79,025 = Rs. 4,78,675 as unexplained investment under s. 69 of the IT Act, 1961, vide assessment order dt. 20th March, 1986. Aggrieved by the said assessment order the assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A), Rajkot, and the CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case as well as assessee's submissions set aside the assessment order vide. his order dt. 20th March, 1987, and the matter was restored back to the file of the AO with a direction to the AO to provide a copy of the report to the assessee received from the Valuation Cell and after affording the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, if any, addition on account of unexplained cost of construction is required to be made, then it may be allocated in three years in the same proportion in which the assessee is showing the investment.;