Navnath Dagdu Shinde, Aurangabad V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 1(5), Aurangabad

ITA 1159/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1770 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M K VERMA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT . / ITA NO.1158/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SMT. LEELABAI DAGDU SHINDE, AT KRISHNAPUR, POST. BIDKIN, TAL. PAITHAN, AURANGABAD PAN : GPYPS7097C VS. ITO, WARD -1(5), AURANGABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) . / ITA NO.1159/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI NAVNATH DAGDU SHINDE, AT KRISHNAPUR, POST. BIDKIN, TAL. PAITHAN, AURANGABAD PAN : DCJPS5587Q VS. ITO, WARD -1(5), AURANGABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) . / ITA NO.1160/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI ASARAM DAGDU SHINDE, AT KRISHNAPUR, POST. BIDKIN, TAL. PAITHAN, AURANGABAD PAN : CXBPS7603B VS. ITO, WARD -1(5), AURANGABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI KISHOR PHADKE RESPONDENT BY SHRI M.K. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 20-03-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20-03-2019 ITA NOS.1158 TO 1160/PUN/2018 SHINDE GROUP 2 / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THESE THREE APPEALS BY DIFFERENT BUT CONNECTED ASSESSEES RELATE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. SINCE COMMON ISSUE S ARE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS, I AM, THEREFORE, PROCEEDING TO DIS POSE THEM OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVEN IENCE. 2. ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE TIME-BARRED BY 276 DAYS. TH E LD. AR EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS, WITH WHICH I AM SATISFIED. AS SUCH, THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND THE APPEALS ARE ADMITTED FOR DISPOSAL. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF SMT. LEELABAI D. SHINDE (ITA NO.1158/PUN/2018 ) ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH OTHER TWO CO-OWNERS, WHO ARE ALSO APPELLANTS IN THE INSTA NT BATCH OF APPEALS, SOLD CERTAIN PIECE OF LAND OF 2 ACRES FO R A CONSIDERATION OF RS.12.00 LAKH. NO CAPITAL GAIN WAS OFFERE D FOR TAXATION. THE VALUATION FOR THE LEVY OF STAMP DUTY WAS FOUND AT RS.1.43 CRORE. NOTICE U/S.148 WAS ISSUED. IN THE ASSES SMENT COMPLETED U/S.144 R.W.147, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) ADO PTED STAMP VALUATION U/S.50C AS FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION FOR TH E PURPOSE OF CALCULATION OF CAPITAL GAIN. THE ASSESSEES 1/ 3 RD SHARE ITA NOS.1158 TO 1160/PUN/2018 SHINDE GROUP 3 IN THE TOTAL STAMP VALUE AT RS.1.43 CRORE WAS ARRIVED AT RS.47,66,666/-. SUCH AMOUNT WAS ADDED AS LONG TERM CA PITAL GAIN. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE CAME TO BE DISMISSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 4. THE FACTS APROPOS THE OTHER TWO ASSESSES, WHO ARE OTH ER CO- OWNERS, ARE SIMILAR IN ASMUCHAS SAME AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN ADDED IN THEIR HANDS AS WELL. ALL THE THREE ASSESSES ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEV ANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEES SOLD THE ABOVE STATED PIECE OF LAND FOR A SUM O F RS.12.00 LAKH, BUT NO AMOUNT WAS, IN FACT, RECEIVED AS TH E CHEQUES ISSUED WERE DISHONOURED. THE LD. AR FURTHER SU BMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED A CIVIL SUIT IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 2018 AGAINST THE BUYERS WHO PURCHASED THE LAND AND CHEQU ES ISSUED BY THEM FOR RS.12.00 LAKH, WERE BOUNCED. THE LD . AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CHAIRMAN, HOUSING PINGRI SOCIETY FILED A CIVIL SUIT AGAINST THE BUYERS OF THE LAND AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEES IN SEPTEMBER 2011 CLAIMING THAT THE PLOT OF LAND, SUBJECT MATTER OF THE EXTANT SALE, STOOD ALREADY SOLD TO IT WAY BACK IN 1968 AND HENCE, THERE COULD BE NO FURTHER TRANS FER OF ITA NOS.1158 TO 1160/PUN/2018 SHINDE GROUP 4 SUCH LAND BY THE ASSESSEES. MY ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TOWAR DS A COPY OF THE CIVIL SUIT FILED IN THIS RESPECT. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE ABOVE CIVIL SUITS ARE STILL PENDING IN THE CIVIL COURTS AND ARE LIKELY TO BE DECIDED SHORTLY. HE STATED THAT NOT ONLY THE RECOVERY OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.12.00 LAKH HAS BEEN JEOPARDISED BUT EVEN THE TITLE OF THE PROPERTY SOLD IS ALSO NOT CLEAR. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE FAIRNESS OF THE THINGS IF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS ARE SET-ASIDE AND THE M ATTER IS REMITTED TO THE AO FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AS HAVE BEEN NARRATED ABOVE. NO SE RIOUS OBJECTION WAS TAKEN BY THE LD. DR. CONCURRING WITH THE SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES, I SE T-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO FOR DECIDING THIS ISSUE AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING A REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEES. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTIC AL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH MARCH, 2019. SD/- (R.S.SYAL) / VICE PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 20 TH MARCH, 2019 ITA NOS.1158 TO 1160/PUN/2018 SHINDE GROUP 5 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (APPEALS)-1, AURANGABAD 4. THE PR. CIT-1, AURANGABAD 5. , , SMC / DR SMC, ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 20-03-2019 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 20-03-2019 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *