Shri Rajan Vinodchandra Shah, Ahmedabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-6, Ahmedabad

ITA 1840/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6030 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROOP CHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY MAJMUDAR
• Section: 143(3); 54F

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 1840/AHD/2015 RAJAN V SHAH VS. DCIT A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND MAHAVIR PRASAD JM] I.T.A. NO.1840/AHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 RAJAN V SHAH .....APPELLANT D-64, ARYAMAN BUNGLOWS, OPP. ANAND NIKETAN SCHOOL, SHILAJ ROAD, THALTEJ, AHMEDABAD-380054 [PAN : APJPS 3164 F] VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX .RESPONDENT CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD APPEARANCES BY: SANJAY MAJMUDAR FOR THE APPELLANT ROOPCHAND FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 22.01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 13.02.2018 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR, AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE APPELLANT CHALLE NGES CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 23 RD MARCH 2015 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-13, AHMEDABAD, IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE HONBLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ONLY PARTIALLY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITAT LUDHIANA BENCH IN CASE OF ANU AGARAL V/S. ITO, VIII (1), LUDHIANA [2012] 28 TAXMANN.COM 286 ( CHD) AND DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SUO MOTO OFFERED TH E CAPITAL GAIN AS INCOME IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND HAS ALSO PAID TAX THERE ON. FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE AFORESAID DECISION WHEREIN THE HONBLE ITAT LUDHIANA BENCH HAD ISSUED NECESSARY DIRECTIONS THAT THE TAX PAID SUBSE QUENTLY NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED AGAINST THE CAPITAL GAIN TAX LIABILITY ARI SING IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN QUESTION. THE APPELLANT PREFERS THIS APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT SIMILAR DIRECTION OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY THE HONBLE C IT(A) IN CASE OF THE APPELLANT ALSO. 2. THE HONBLE CIT(A) HAS ALSO ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISREGARDING THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE APPELLANT ABOUT THE HOUS EHOLD EXPENSES AND THAT THE CASH WITHDRAWAL BY MOTHER OF RS.8 LACS WERE MOR E THAN SUFFICIENT TO TAKE CARE OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OF A JOINT FAMILY OF THE APPELLANT. ITA NO. 1840/AHD/2015 RAJAN V SHAH VS. DCIT A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, LEA RNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE DOES NOT WISH TO PURSUE THE ABOVE GRIEVANCES AS LONG AS HE IS NOT SUBJECTED TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 54F INASMUCH AS WHILE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE SAME IN THIS Y EAR WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE, ON HIS OWN, ADDED THE SAME BACK IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 3-14 AS WELL. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT DISPUTE THE ST AND OF THE ASSESSEE, AND SUBMITS THAT ONCE THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 54F REACHE S FINALITY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO NECESSARILY REMOVE THE SAME DISALLOWANCE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AS WRONGLY OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE POSITION, AND THE FAIR STAND OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED ON THE CONDITION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL DELETE THE SUO MOTU DISALLOW ANCE UNDER SECTION 54F OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 4. GROUND NO.2 WAS NOT PRESSED AND IS DISMISSED AS SUCH. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN THE TE RMS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 13 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- MAHAVIR PRASAD PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 13 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018 **BT* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: ... 12.02.2018... ORDER PREP ARED AS PER 2 PAGES MANUSCRIPT OF HONBLE AM, WHICH ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH..... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 12.02.2018..... 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR . P.S./P.S.: . 13.02.2018............ 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: ... 13.02.2018...... 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK : ..... 13.02.2018................... 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK : . 7. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 8. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: ......