HARI KRISHAN BUDHIA HUF , RANCHI V. DCIT CIRCLE-1 , RANCHI

ITA 04/RAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0257 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: INDERJEET SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: D SANNIGRAHI
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition
• Section: 143(3); 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 04 / RAN / 201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2013-14 HARI KRISHNA BUDHIA (HUF), NR. SURENDRA NATH CENTENNARY SCHOOL, H.B. ROAD, BOOTY MORE, RANCHI-834001 [ PAN NO.AABHH 6477 D ] V/S . DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI-834001 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI D.SANNIGRAHI, CA /BY RESPONDENT SHRI INDERJEET SINGH, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 06-03-2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 06-03-2020 / O R D E R PER BENCH (ORAL):- THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-RANCHIS ORDER DATED 11.09.2017 PASSED IN CASE NO.CIT(A), RANCHI/10026/2016-17 INVO LVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE A CT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED 2. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT THE SOLE DISPUTE BE TWEEN THE PARTIES HEREIN IS QUA THE COST OF ACQUISITION OF ASSESSEES CAPITAL ASSE T ACQUIRED WAY BACK IN THE YEAR 1957 AND SOLD ON 26.02.2012. ITA NO.04/RAN/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 HARI KRISHNA BUDHIA (HUF) VS. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI PAG E 2 3. THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT TO PLACE RELIANCE ON A REGIS TERED VALUERS REPORT STATING COST OF ACQUISITION AS ON 01.04.1981 AT 60,54,687/- AFTER ADOPTING REVERSE INDEXATION METHOD. THE SAID VALUER APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CALLED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER WHO FAILED TO SUPPORT HIS IMPUGNED VALUATION BY COGENT EVIDENCE. THIS MADE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES TO GO BY REVENUE RECORDS IN THE VERY LOCALITY THEREBY TAKING COST OF ACQUISITIO N AT 186,000/-. THIS DIFFERENCE OF COST OF ACQUISITION I.E. 60,54,687/- BY REVERSE INDEXATION AND 1,86,000/- GOING BY THE REVENUE RECORD FORMS SUBJEC T-MATTER OF DISPUTE BEFORE US IN THE MATTER. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE AS WELL AS THE CIT-DR APPEARING AT THE REVENUES BEHEST. THE ABOVE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MAKING IT CLEAR THAT NEIT HER OF THE TWO PARTIES HAVE BEEN ABLE TO JUSTIFY THEIR VALUATIONS I.E., EXACT L OCATION AND ON SALE CONSIDERATION BASIS; RESPECTIVELY. WE THEREFORE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NEITHER PARTYS STAND DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED IN ENTIRETY. WE THUS CONCLUDE THAT A LUMP SUM COST OF ACQUISITION ON ESTIMATION BASIS OF 3,00,000/- W.E.F. 01.04.1981 BY ADOPTING RULE OF THUMB WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. BOTH PARTIES GET PART RELIEF IN SAME TERMS. NECESSARY CO MPUTATION INCLUDING THAT OF INTEREST SHALL FOLLOW AS PER LAW KEEPING IN MIND HO N'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS DECISION IN AJAY PRAKASH VERMA VS. ITO (2010) TA NO. 38 OF 2010 REPORTED IN 2013(1) TMI 140. 5. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN FORE GOING TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT T HE CLOSE OF HEARING ON FRIDAY, 6 TH MARCH 2020 SD/- SD/- ( ) ('# ) (DR. A.L. SAINI) (S.S.GODARA) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) RANCHI, *DKP $- 06 / 03 /20 20 ITA NO.04/RAN/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 HARI KRISHNA BUDHIA (HUF) VS. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI PAG E 3 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-HARI KRISHNA BUDHIA (HUF) NR. SURENDRA N ATH CENTENNARY SCHOOL H.B. ROAD, BOOTY MORE, RANCHI-834001 2 . /RESPONDENT-DCIT, CIRI-1, RANCHI-834001 3. / 2 / CONCERNED CIT RANCHI 4. 2- / CIT (A) RANCHI 5. 5 ##/, /, / DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. ; / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , SR.PS, (ON TOUR), RANCHI