Case Law Details
Brief of the Case
ITAT Ahmadabad held In the case of ACIT vs. Shri Kanakkumar J. Jariwala that mere valuation report is not sufficient to conclude that the assessee has made unexplained investment. From perusal of the assessment, nowhere it reveals that inspite of search, Revenue was in a position to lay its hands on any material exhibiting the unexplained investment made by the assessee, over and above one stated in the books of accounts.
Facts of the Case
A search operation u/s 132 was carried out at the premises of Colourtex Group of Surat on 26.7.2006. The assessee is a member of this group and his premises were also searched on 26.7.2006. A notice under section 153A was issued upon the assessee. To this notice, the assessee has filed his return of income on 31.3.2007 declaring total income at Rs.51,65,170/-.The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. The AO has rejected the books result of the assessee. He found that the assessee had constructed a building at RS No.175, paiki, Block No.G-2, Bhestan, Surat. The AO was not satisfied with the cost of construction shown in the books of accounts. He formed an opinion that there was an under-invoicing of bills, and therefore, the AO made reference to the valuation officer, who has determined the value of the property. On the basis of report there were difference on account of declared cost and estimated cost. Consequently additions were made for these differences.
Contention of the Assessee
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
