Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), New Delhi v. Delhi Vocational School Society

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 296/2018 & CM APPL. 9800/2018 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through:

Mr. Asheesh Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Ajit Sharma, Jr. Standing Counsel for appellant.

versus DELHI VOCATIONAL SCHOOL SOCIETY ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Madhur Aggarwal, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 14.03.2018 The Revenue's appeal urges that the lower appellate authorities fell into error in rejecting the valuation adopted by the AO based upon valuer's report. The transaction value in this case was `4.35 crores for 2.045 acre area plot acquired by the respondent/assessee which had established and was administering a school. According to the mandate of the law, it was under a compulsion to provide playground facilities which it did by purchasing the plot in question. Questioning the transaction value, the AO referred the issue to a District Valuation Officer (DVO) who reported - largely based upon his personal impression and knowledge that the value of land in the vicinity was approximately 10 times higher. The AO therefore added the differential between ITA 296/2018

the transaction value and the value reported by the DVO, to the assessee's income under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as "the Act"); the assessee successfully appealed to the CIT(A). The Appellate Commissioner's decision was affirmed by the ITAT in the Revenue's appeal before it. It is urged that the lower appellate authority ought to have taken greater care and permitted the AO to make further enquiries as to the precise value of the land and not merely rested upon the decisions of this Court, which had indicated that the adoption of a valuation report per se could not be the basis for a conclusive determination under Section 69B of the Act which was resorted to in this case.

This Court is of the opinion that the findings of fact arrived at by the lower appellate authorities are conclusive. Besides, there is no material on the record to suggest that the land in question was capable of any use other than as a playground or open area, which is what was needed by the assessee's school.

In these circumstances, the Court discerns no substantial question of law. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J A. K. CHAWLA, J MARCH 14, 2018 kks ITA 296/2018