SMT. RASIDA KHAN, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5-5, JAIPUR

ITA 1506/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9898 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-03-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANURADHA JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH JES'K LH 'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 1506/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SMT. RASIDA KHAN, 23,24, CHOUDHARY VIHAR, OUTSIDE GANGAPOLE, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. I.T.O., WARD 5(5), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: DXWPK 9690 E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : MS. ANURADHA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 19/03/2019 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/03/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A)-2, JAIPUR DATED 09/11/2018 FOR THE A.Y. 20 08-09 IN THE MATTER ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO ADD ITION OF RS. 4,43,094/- ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF HOUSE PROPERTY. 3. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PER USED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEI VED FROM THE O/O ITA 1506/JP/2018 SMT. RASHIDA KHAN VS. ITO 2 I&CI(CIB) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAD SOLD IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FOR SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.5,50,000/- WHICH WAS ASSESSED BY THE SUB-REGISTRAR FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSE AT RS.9,93,094/-. THEREFORE, AO CONCLUDED THAT DIFFERENCE OF RS.4,43,094/- HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 O F THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER DID NOT GIVE CREDIT OF CONSTRUCTION DONE BY HER AND MADE AD DITION ON ACCOUNT OF CAPITAL GAINS. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE REOPENING AS WELL AS THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND CARE FULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FOUND THAT T HE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE THE ADDITION BY DECLINING THE ASSESSEES C LAIM OF CONSTRUCTION COST HAVING BEEN INCURRED TWICE. FROM THE RECORD, I FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE ON COST OF IMPROV EMENT TWICE, ONE IN FY 1992-93 FOR RS.2 LACS AND ANOTHER IN FY 2003-04 AT RS.3,50,000/-. HOWEVER, IN THE REPLY DATED 03.06.2015 SHE WRONGLY TO OK THE COST OF IMPROVEMENT IN FY 1992-93 AT RS. 1,69,000/- AND DID NOT CONSIDERED THE COST OF IMPROVEMENT OF RS.3,50,000/- INCURRED I N FY 2003-04. THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOTTED THE LAND ON 10.1 0.1975 BY THE ITA 1506/JP/2018 SMT. RASHIDA KHAN VS. ITO 3 COOPERATIVE SOCIETY IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THEREAFTER SH E MADE CONSTRUCTION IN TWO PHASES AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE MAP OF THE PROP ERTY ENCLOSED WITH THE SALE DEED'. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT CONDUCT ING ANY ENQUIRY HAS SIMPLY REJECTED THE SUBSEQUENT CLAIM OF THE ASSESSE E IGNORING THAT ASSESSEE BEING AN OLD LADY IN THE FIRST REPLY HAS I NCORRECTLY STATED THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AT A LOWER AMOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ACCEPT THE COST OF CONSTRUCTIO N CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DELETE THE ADDITION SO MADE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH MARCH, 2019 SD/- JES'K LH 'KEKZ ( RAMESH C SHARMA ) YS[KK LNL;@ YS[KK LNL;@ YS[KK LNL;@ YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27 TH MARCH, 2019 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANTS- SMT. RASIDA KHAN, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE I.T.O., WARD 5(5), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1506/JP/2018) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR