Writ petition challenging DVO reference in capital gains case held premature and not maintainable

5-Second Takeaway

The writ petition was held premature and not maintainable because the reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer had not yet resulted in any final assessment order. The court also noted that whether the Assessing Officer was justified in invoking the alternative course in the appellate order required clarification from the appellate authority.

The dispute arose from an appellate order on valuation of property for computation of capital gains. The Commissioner (Appeals) directed adoption of the stamp-duty value of Rs. 57,92,000, or alternatively a reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer if the Assessing Officer considered that figure not to reflect fair market value.

The Assessing Officer thereafter made a reference to the DVO, and the assessee approached the court in writ proceedings. The court held that the challenge was premature because the valuation reference had not yet culminated in a final assessment order.

It further observed that the question whether the Assessing Officer was justified in taking the alternative route contemplated in the appellate order was a matter requiring clarification from the appellate authority that had passed the order.

Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable at that stage.