SMT SWARAJ FOUJDAR, BHARATPUR V. ITO, BHARATPUR

ITA 185/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2108 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DHK
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital asset
• Section: 80C; 50C; 54F; 2

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS [KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YAD AV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 185/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13. SMT. SWARAJ FOUJDAR, C/O OPP. BIRD SANCTUARY, GHANA ROAD, BHARATPUR (RAJ.) CUKE VS. ITO, WARD(2), BHARATPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAEPF 5425 G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY: NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 31.08.2017. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/09/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ALWAR, DATED 07/11/2016, PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012- 13. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL:- 1. THE LD. AO HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAWS IN RE STRICTING THE EXMEPTION U/S 54F UPTO RS. 51,00,000/-ONLY. PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 54F OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 READS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 54F (1)..(A) IF THE COST OF THE NEW ASSET IS NOT LESS THAN THE NET CONSIDERATION IN RESPECT OF THE ORIGINAL ASSET, THE WHOLE OF SUCH CAPITAL GAIN SHALL NOT BE CHARGED UNDER SECTION 45 . EXPLANATION- FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION,- 2 ITA NO. 185/JP/2017. SWARAJ FOUJDAR, BHARATPUR. NET CONSIDERATION, IN RELATION TO THE TRANSFER O F A CAPITAL ASSET, MEANS THE FULL VALUE OF THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF THE CAPITAL ASSET AS REDU CED BY ANY EXPENDITURE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY IN CONN ECTION WITH SUCH TRANSFER. FROM THE ABOVE PROVISIONS ITS AMPLY CLEAR THAT DEE MING PROVISION OF SECTION 50C OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARE FOR THE PUR POSE OF FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION FOR SECTION 48 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND DOES NOT APPLY TO THE EXEMPTION PROVISION U/S 54F OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE LD. AO HAS ERRED ON FATS AND IN LAW IN DISAL LOWING THE CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 3,80,840/- ON ARBITRARY BASIS WITHOUT ANY PROOF OF THE SAME. 3. THE LD. AO HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN ADDI NG THE INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF SAVING BANK INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS. 54 ,191/-. 4. THE LD. AO HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DISA LLOWING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80C AMOUNTING TO RS. 71,000/- 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD/ALTER GROUNDS OF APP EAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS TRANSPIRED FROM THE RECORD THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXE D FOR HEARING ON VARIOUS DATES I.E. 06/04/2017, 11/05/2017, 06/06/2017 IN ALL THESE DAT ES NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NO APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMEN T IS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THESE FACTS THE APPEAL WAS HEARD IN THE ABSEN CE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. LD. D/R SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO ILLEGALITY ORDER SO PASSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. D/R AS NO ONE APPEARED ON VARIOUS DATES ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESEE. THEREFORE, IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DEC ISION OF DELHI BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (D EL.) AND HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH 3 ITA NO. 185/JP/2017. SWARAJ FOUJDAR, BHARATPUR. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF P ROSECUTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 185/JP/2017 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY, THE 04 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO ( DQY HKKJR ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 04/09/2017. POOJA/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT-. SWARAJ FOUJDAR, OPP. BIRD SANCT URY, GHANA ROAD, BHARATPUR. 2. THE RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD-2, BHARATPUR. 3. THE CIT, 4. THE CIT (A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 185/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR