Shri Nitin R. Patel, Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(3), Surat

ITA 192/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9849 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIMAL I MEHTA
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 192/AHD/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI NITIN R. PATEL, PROP. OF M/S. PATEL LAND CORPORATION, AT & POST MORA HAZIRA ROAD, TAL. CHORYASHI, DIST: SURAT 394510 PAN : AEDPP 1287 M VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3), SURAT / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI VIMAL I. MEHTA, SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 22/11/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22/11/2016 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I, SUR AT DATED 06.11.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE SOLE GROUND RAISED IS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A S WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (AP PEALS) HAS ERRED CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN L EVYING PENALTY OF RS.3,23,478/- U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET, CONTENDS THAT THE ITAT, VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 30.03.2016 IN ITA NO. 2477/AHD /2010, DELETED THE QUANTUM ADDITION ITSELF, BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HAS RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ALL THE PERSONS HAVE SUBMITTE D COPY OF FORM NO.7/12 AND FORM NO.8A FROM LAND REVENUE RECORDS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO IRRIGATION FACILITY IN T HE SAID AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH STANDS IN THE NAME OF THE DONORS WHO ARE FAMI LY MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE CANNOT ACCEPT THE REASONING GIVEN BY T HE AUTHORITIES BELOW FOR MAKING ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT AS THE REVENUE HA S NOT PLACED ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD SUGGESTING THAT THE LAND WAS BARREN AND N O AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES SMC-ITA NO. 192/AHD/2014 NITIN R. PATEL VS. ITO AY : 2006-07 2 WERE CARRIED OUT. IT IS A NORMAL PRACTICE IN THE AG RICULTURAL SECTOR THAT THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE, APART FROM SELLING THROUGH AG RICULTURAL PRODUCE COMMITTEE, IS ALSO SOLD DIRECTLY TO THE CONSUMERS. KEEPING INTO MIND, THE AMOUNT OF GIFT GIVEN BY VARIOUS FAMILY MEMBERS AND ALSO THE PROOF OF LAND HOLDING, WE HEREBY DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF GIFT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, TREATI NG SUCH GIFT AS UNEXPLAINED. THIS GROUND OF THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. IT IS, THEREFORE, CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE QUANTUM ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED, THE CONSEQUENTIAL PENALTY DESERVES TO BE D ELETED. 4. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IS HEARD. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. SINCE THE QUANTUM ADDITION IN QUESTION ITSELF HAS BEEN DELETE D BY THE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 30.03.2016 IN ITA NO. 2477/AHD/2010, TH E PENALTY MADE IN RESPECT OF SUCH ADDITION CANNOT SURVIVE. ACCORDING LY, THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF RS.3,23,478/- IS DELETED AN D ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22 ND NOVEMBER, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- R.P. TOLANI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD; DATED 22/11/2016 *BIJU T., SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD