Take your example, $$\int x\ln x\,dx.$$
Note $x\gt 0$ must be assumed (so the integrand makes sense).
If we let $u = \ln x$ and $dv= x\,dx$, then we can take $v$ to be any function with $dv = x\,dx$. So the "generic" $v$ will be, as you note, $v = \frac{1}{2}x^2 + C$. What happens then if we use this "generic" $v$?
\begin{align*}
\int x\ln x\,dx &= \ln x\left(\frac{1}{2}x^2 + C\right) - \int \left(\frac{1}{2}x^2+C\right)\frac{1}{x}\,dx\\
&= \frac{1}{2}x^2\ln x + C\ln x - \int\left(\frac{1}{2}x + \frac{C}{x}\right)\,dx\\
&= \frac{1}{2}x^2\ln x + C\ln x - \frac{1}{4}x^2 - C\ln x + D\\
&= \frac{1}{2}x^2\ln x - \frac{1}{4}x^2 + D,
\end{align*}
so in the end, we get the same result no matter what value of $C$ we take for $v$.
This says that we can take any value of $C$ and still get the same answer. Since we can take any value of $C$, why not take the simplest one, the one that does not require us to carry around an extra term that is going to cancel out anyway? Say..., $C=0$?
This works in general. If you replace $v$ with $v+C$ in the integration by parts formula, you have
\begin{align*}
\int u\,dv &= u(v+C) - \int(v+C)\,du = uv + Cu - \int v\,du - \int C\,du\\
&= uv+Cu - \int v\,du - Cu = uv-\int v\,du.
\end{align*}
So the answer is the same regardless of the value of $C$, and so we take $C=0$ because that makes our life simpler.