Nineesha Das Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
Assessee had purchased a commercial property for Rs. 59.94 lakh, whereas the stamp duty value was Rs. 1.39 crore. AO treated 25% of the differential amount, corresponding to the Assessee’s 1/4th share, as income from other sources u/s 56(2)(x). CIT(A) upheld the addition by passing an ex parte order.
Before the Tribunal, Assessee explained that actual consideration of Rs. 79.92 lakh had been paid jointly & that AO had erred in mechanically adopting stamp duty value without referring the matter to the DVO. Tribunal observed that as per the Calcutta High Court ruling in Sunil Kumar Agarwal (ITA No. 221/2013), it is incumbent upon AO to offer Assessee an option for DVO reference before making addition u/s 56(2)(x). Since AO had failed to do so, the matter required fresh adjudication.
Considering Assessee’s non-appearance in earlier proceedings, the Tribunal restored the matter to AO for de novo consideration, subject to payment of Rs. 25,000 as cost to the Legal Aid Services of Calcutta High Court within 60 days. Tribunal directed that if Assessee failed to pay the cost, the ex parte order of CIT(A) would stand confirmed. With this conditional direction, the appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
