BHANUPRASAD MAGANLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD V. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

MA 49/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around a Miscellaneous Application by Bhanuprasad Maganlal Patel against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the Assessment Year 2015-16. The application contested the Tribunal's earlier decision, which had implications on the tax treatment of profits from the sale of land. The applicant argued that there were mistakes of law and fact in the Tribunal's decision, particularly concerning the application of the rule of consistency and the taxability of certain capital gains. The Tribunal, however, upheld its previous decision, stating that the issues raised were either already addressed or constituted re-arguments not permissible under the relevant section of the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 23213 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295) (SC), section 254(2) of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income; Rule of consistency
• Section: 254(2); 54F

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Bhanuprasad Maganlal Patel 30, Manikamal Soc-1, Nr. Surdhara Cross Road, Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380054 PAN No. ABVPP8960A (Appellant) Vs The ACIT Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 06-12-2024 Date of pronouncement : 27-02-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the Assessee as against the order dated 12-01-2024 passed by this Tribunal in ITA No. 07/Ahd/2019 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The applicant submit that broadly speaking there are two kinds of mistakes in the aforesaid order of the Tribunal namely: M.A. No: 49/Ahd/2024 (in ITA No: 07/Ahd/2019) Assessment Year: 2015-16) M.A. No. 49/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2015-16 Bhanuprasad Maganlal Patel Vs. ACIT 2 (a) There is a mistake of law in as much as the rule of consistency laid down in case of CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295) (SC) in as much as, the regular assessment for AY 2014-15 was completed by AO as observed at page-7 of the assessment order the profit on sale of land as capital gain of Rs. 25,86,928/-therefore, the contrary view taken by the Tribunal is not justified. (b) The appellant has given the details of the status of assessment in the hands of the other seven co-owners vide synopsis dated 19.09.2022 out of whom the assessment was re-opened or framed in case of two parties of which one had opted for VSV as observed by Hon'ble Tribunal at page- 13 of the order. In other words the assessment in case of five parties, the same has not been disturbed and accepted returned income. (c) There is a mistake of fact in as much as the addition of Rs. 1,65,87,450/- has been confirmed for the year under appeal which is the aggregate profit on sale of land but Rs. 25,86,928/- was already taxed in earlier year AY 2014-15. So balance Rs. 1,40,00,522/ could be subject matter of tax as observed at page-7 of the assessment order. (d) The ground No.3.2 with regard to the year of taxability of income has not been disposed off by Hon'ble Tribunal so that the order should be record to that extent. 3. Heard rival submissions at length and perused the materials available on record. Regarding Ground No. 1, this issue was dealt in Para 7 Page 11 of the order, wherein categorically held that there is no assessment made for the Asst. Year 2014-15. The reference made by the assessee in Page No. 7 of the assessment order is nothing but the reply filed by the assessee, which is extracted by the Assessing Officer in Paragrpah No. 4.1 [which is running from Page Nos. 4 to 10] of the assessment order. Hence this ground is misconceived and liable to be dismissed. 4. Regarding Ground No. 2 in Paragrpah No. 8 of this order in Page No. 12 and 13, the above issue is discussed at length. The assessee M.A. No. 49/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2015-16 Bhanuprasad Maganlal Patel Vs. ACIT 3 has not produced any details of assessment about the other co- owners, so raising this ground is re-arguing the same which is not permissible under section 254(2) of the Act and this ground is liable to be dismissed. 5. Regarding Ground No. (c) and (d) are concerned, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the Appeal before this Tribunal are as follows: 2.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and on facts in confirming profit arising on sale of land as business income instead of capital gain of Rs.1,65,87,950/- and disallowance of exemption u/s 54F of Rs. 75.16.000/-. 2.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld.CIT(A) ought not to have upheld profit arising on sale of land as business income instead of capital gain Rs.1,65,87,950/- and disallowance of exemption u/s. 54F of Rs.75,16,000/-. 5.1. Thus, there is no mistake apparent on record as against the order passed by this Tribunal. There is no merits in the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Assessee, therefore the same is hereby dismissed. 6. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27-02-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 27/02/2025 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- M.A. No. 49/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2015-16 Bhanuprasad Maganlal Patel Vs. ACIT 4 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद "