Shri Samir Rasmukh Bhai Rav, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1549/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 154920114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL SINGH SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: RAY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1549/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) SHRI SAMIR HASMUKH BHAI RAY, VS. ITO, WARD 39 (4) , B 08/911, GDITL TOWER, NEW DELHI. NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE, PRITAMPURA, DELHI 110 034. (PAN : AAAPR1263N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.H. RAY REVENUE BY : SHRI SATPAL SINGH, SENIOR DR O R D E R PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM TH E ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS)-XXVIII, NEW DELHI DATED 01.03.2012. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A PROPRIETOR OF M/S. EVEREST PLA STICS CARRYING MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES OF MOLDING POWDER. WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS SOLD LAND MEASURING 2 KANALS AND 16 MARLAS IN VILLAGE PAWALA KHUSARPUR, TEHSIL & DISTT. GURGAON, HARYANA FOR A SUM OF RS.21 LACS AND CLAIMED CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.19 ,90,000/- AS EXEMPTED BEING THE LAND SOLD WAS AGRICULTURAL LAND. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.19,90,000/- AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND INITIA TED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ITA NO.1549/DEL./2012 2 INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OF FICER LEVIED THE PENALTY AND THE CIT (A) HAS ALSO SUSTAINED THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.4,21,296/-. 3. ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR LEVYING PENALTY WAS THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION WAS NOT AN AGRICULTURAL LAND BUT WAS AN INDUSTRIAL LAND AND THIS FACT WAS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR FILING THE IN ACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. 4. BEFORE US, THERE IS AN APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF THE AP PEAL AGAINST THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THE ISSUE OF ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BEFORE US. IN THESE EVIDENCES, THERE IS ONE LETTER FROM STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AND TEHSILDAR, GURGAON WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT THERE IS NO ENTRY OF INDUSTRIAL USE IN REVENUE RECO RD WITH REGARD TO THE LAND BEARING KILA NO.25/13/2 MEASURING 2 KANAL 16 MARLAS . AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ADMIT THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REMIT THE WHOLE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DECIDED DE NOVO AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES SUBMITTED AN D OF COURSE, AFTER PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STAND ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 8 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014/TS ITA NO.1549/DEL./2012 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-XXVIII, NEW DELHI 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.