Assessee had purchased immovable property and there was a difference of value as disclosed by assessee and adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority. Assessing Officer treated difference as deemed income under section 56(2)(ii)(b) and added it to income of assessee. The assessee had not objected before Assessing Officer regarding valuation adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority but first time made objection before Commissioner (Appeals) regarding valuation of property. Tribunal held that since Commissioner (Appeals) has conterminous powers with Assessing Officer, matter should have been referred for valuation to Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO). Accordingly the matter was set aside to file of Commissioner(Appeals) for deciding afresh after referring matter to DVO. (AY. 2015-16)
Jaykishan Parchani v. ITO (2020) 184 ITD 323 (Indore)(Trib.)
S. 56 : Income from other sources-Stamp valuation-Objection raised first time before CIT(A)-Valuation of property-Power of CIT(A) is coterminous powers with Assessing Officer, matter should have been referred for valuation to Departmental Valuation Officer-Matter remanded to the file of CIT(A) with the direction to refer the matter to Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO). [S. 45, 55A, 56(2)(ii)(b)]