SHRI NILESH KUMAR JHALANI, Ujjain V. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Ratlam

ITA 135/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5679 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHD JAVED
• Assessee Lawyers: S N AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

NILESH KUMAR JHALANI ITA NO. 135/IND/2016 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.135/IND/2016 A.Y.2005-06 NILESH KUMAR JHALANI RATLAM PAN AETPJ 4935J ::: APPELLANT VS ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX RATLAM ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S.N. AGRAWAL RESPONDENT BY SHRI MOHD. JAVED DATE OF HEARING 19.7.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 7 .7.2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), UJJAIN, DATED 2.11.2015. 2. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A ) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF NILESH KUMAR JHALANI ITA NO. 135/IND/2016 2 RS.3,80,000/- TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY INVOK ING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. 3. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FIL ED RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.7,13,004/ -. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF PROPERTY SITUAT ED AT SURVEY NO. 254/5, RATLAM. THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF THI S PROPERTY WAS SHOWN AT RS.1 LAC AS AGAINST THE MARKET VALUE OF RS.4,80,000/- DETERMINED BY THE STAMP DUTY AUTHOR ITY. THUS, THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN WAS SHOWN LESS BY RS.3,80,000/- IN THE RETURN OF INCOME WHICH RESULTE D IN ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHETHER HE HAS DECLARED LTCG AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT OR NOT. IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED REGARDING VALUATION U/S 50C WE STATE THAT THE SAID LAND WAS S OLD DURING 2004-05 IN THE NAME OF MINOR ACCORDING TO TH E NILESH KUMAR JHALANI ITA NO. 135/IND/2016 3 AGREEMENT MADE PRIOR TO 2002 THEREFORE THE VALUATIO N ADOPTED BY AUTHORITY IN 2006 IS HAVING NO EFFECT ON US . THE REJECTED THIS SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROU ND THAT IN THE SALE DEED DATED 23.6.2004 NOTHING IS MENTIO NED ABOUT AN Y AGREEMENT MADE PRIOR TO 2002. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND WORKED OUT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AT RS.3,72,433/-. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRME D THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. AFTER CONSIDERING TH E FACTS AND ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES, I FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT REFERRED THE MATTER TO THE DEPARTMENTAL VALUATION OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE DECISIO N OF THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHANDANI BHOCHAR; 323 ITR 510 SHALL APPLY. I, THEREFORE, RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFI CER WITH THE NILESH KUMAR JHALANI ITA NO. 135/IND/2016 4 DIRECTION TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE DVO FOR VALUATION PURPOSES AND DECIDE THE SAME ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 27 JULY, 2016 SD/- ( D.T. GARASIA) JUDI CIAL MEMBER 27 TH JULY, 2016 DN/- NILESH KUMAR JHALANI ITA NO. 135/IND/2016 5