Palapur Sundararajan, CHENNAI V. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 9(1), CHENNAI

ITA 1744/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8934 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MARUDHA PANDIAN
• Keywords: Value adopted by valuation officer; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , , ( BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1744/CHNY/2019 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016-17 SHRI PALAPUR SUNDARARAJAN, PARTHASARATHY, OLD NO.149, NEW NO.82, VENKATRANGAN PILLAI STREET, TRIPLICANE, CHENNAI-600 005. VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER- OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-9(1), CHENNAI. [ PAN: AJNPP 0232 B ] ( * /APPELLANT) ( +,* /RESPONDENT) * - / APPELLANT BY : MR.K.RAVI, ADV. +,* - /RESPONDENT BY : MR.MARUDHA PANDIAN, JCIT - /DATE OF HEARING : 08.07.2019 - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.07.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-10, CHENNAI, I N ITA NO.127/18- 19/CIT(A)-10 DATED 21.05.2019 FOR THE AY 2016-17. 2. MR. MARUDHA PANDIAN, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF O F THE REVENUE AND MR.K.RAVI, ADV., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. ITA NO.1744/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY WHICH C ONSISTED OF LAND AND BUILDING FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.75.00 LAKHS. HO WEVER, AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION, THE SUB-REGISTRAR OF TRIPLICANE HAD C HARGED ADDITIONAL STAMP DUTY ON THE BUILDING ON A DIFFERENTIAL VALUE OF RS. 9,07,549/-. THE AO HAD PROPOSED TO ADD THE SAME U/S.43CA(2) R.W.S.55A OF T HE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUES TED THE PROPERTY TO BE REFERRED FOR VALUATION TO THE VALUATION OFFICER FOR FIXING THE APPROPRIATE VALUE U/S.43CA(2) R.W.S.55A OF THE ACT. IT WAS A S UBMISSION THAT THE AO HAD REFERRED THE PROPERTY TO THE VALUATION OFFICER VIDE A LETTER DATED 13.12.2018 FOR DETERMINING THE VALUE U/S.43CA(2) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS GETTING TIME BARRED, THE AO H AD PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT BY ADDING THE SAID AMOUNT O F RS.9,07,549/- U/S.43CA(2) OF THE ACT. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT T HOUGH THE LD.CIT(A) HAD DIRECTED THE AO TO ADOPT THE DVOS VALUE AND RE -DETERMINE THE PROFIT ON THE SALE OF LAND AND BUILDING, THERE SEEMS TO BE THE SOME CONFUSION ON THE PART OF THE INTERPRETATION OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD NO OBJEC TION IF THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO F OR ADOPTING THE VALUE AS DETERMINED BY THE DVO. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ITA NO.1744/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: 6. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE AO HAS REFERRED THE MATTER OF THE VALUATION TO THE DVO VID E AOS LETTER DATED 13.12.2018. THIS BEING SO, AS THE LD.AR HAS CATEGO RICALLY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE DVO REPORT HAS NOT YET BEEN RECEIVED TILL 30.06.2019, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER OBTAINING THE DVOS REPORT AS REQUESTED BY THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 13. 12.2018. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 08 TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED: 08 TH JULY, 2019. TLN - +56 76 /COPY TO: 1. * /APPELLANT 4. 8 /CIT 2. +,* /RESPONDENT 5. 6 + /DR 3. 8 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF