BLUPEX VINIMOY PVT. LTD.,NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS V. I.T.O., WARD - 14(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2274/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Blupex Vinimoy Private Ltd., the appellant, contesting a penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2020-21. The penalty was based on a suspected variation in income due to an unreceived valuation report at the time of the assessment. The main contention was whether the penalty could be levied when the valuation report, which could potentially confirm or refute the assessed variation, was not available. The Tribunal noted that the penalty was based on an estimated addition and that there was no evidence of misreporting or underreporting of income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791222 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, Section 50C of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D HEERAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEP AGARWAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Valuation report
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.2274/KOL/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-2021) Blupex Vinimoy Private Ltd. The Terminus, Room No.415, 4th Floor, 32 Marg, BG-12, AA-1B, North 24 Parganas, New Town, West Bengal-56 Vs ITO, Ward-14(1), Kolkata PAN No. :AABCB 0157 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Deep Agarwal, AR रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Dheeraj, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 09/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 09/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 11.09.2025 for the assessment year 2020-21, confirming the penalty levied u/s.270A of the Act 2. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the appeal is a penalty appeal and the quantum matter is pending before the ld.CIT(A). It was also the submission that the main issue for levy of penalty was a valuation report which had not received by the Assessing Officer when the assessment order was passed. It was the submission that even till date the valuation report has not been received nor has been provided too the assessee. It was the submission in page 2 of the order the ld. CIT(A) has categorically condoned the delay, however, in para 5.7 of his order, he has dismissed Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2274/KOL/2025 2 the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay. It was the submission, at the outset, that the penalty is being levied on a possible/probable variation which is suspected by the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that even till date there is no evidence of misreporting or underreporting. It was the submission that the penalty may be cancelled. 3. In reply, ld.Sr. DR submitted that the issues may be restored to the file of ld.AO. It was the submission that the valuation officer is in the process of preparing the valuation report, insofar as the notice has also been issued to the assessee. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of pages 6 & 7 of the assessment order clearly shows that the Assessing Officer has applied the provisions of Section 50C of the Act and the assessee has claimed the benefit u/s.50C(2) of the Act and asked for reference to the valuation officer. The assessment order is dated 22.09.2022, till date, admittedly valuation report is not available with the Assessing Officer. This is nothing but an estimate which has led to the addition and on an estimated addition, penalty is not leviable. It cannot be held that there is misreporting or underreporting of income, especially when there is a power to estimate and even such estimate has not been done by the DVO as yet. This being so, we are of the view that the penalty levied u/s.270A of the Act in the case of the assessee is unsustainable and consequently the same is deleted. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2274/KOL/2025 3 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09/12/2025. Sd/- (RAJESH KUMAR) Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 09/12/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "