Smt. Raju Bai Soni & others L/H of Late Shri Roopchand Bhuralal Soni, Ujjain V. The CIT, Ujjain

ITA 199/IND/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2756 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI SARDA
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 3 - I.T.A.NO. 199/IND/2009 LATE SHRI ROOPCHAND BHURALAL SONI, UJJAIN IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : APTPS7977Q I.T.A.NO. 199/IND/2009 A.Y. : 1999-2000 LATE SHRI ROOPCHAND BHERULAL SONI, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, UJJAIN THROUGH L/HS SMT.RAJUBAI SONI, SHRI JAGDISH SONI AND SHRI KAILASH SONI, UJJAIN VS APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAVI SARDA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.K.SINGH, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.07.2010 O R D E R PER BENCH THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT, UJJAIN, DATED 20.02.2009, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE ALSO PERUSE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE D ECISION OF THE LD. CIT IN ISSUING DIRECTION TO THE AO TO RE-EXAMIN E THE ISSUE OF QUANTUM PAGE 2 OF 3 - I.T.A.NO. 199/IND/2009 LATE SHRI ROOPCHAND BHURALAL SONI, UJJAIN OF SALE CONSIDERATION BASED UPON THE REVISED SALE A GREEMENT AND ORIGINAL SALE DEED AND ALSO AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OTHER FACTS. LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS A CASE OF CH ANGE OF OPINION AS THE AO HAD TAKEN A POSSIBLE VIEW AFTER CONSIDERING THE TOTAL FACTS. HOWEVER, ON PRECISE QUERY AS REGARD TO THE FACT WHETHER BOTH THE AGREEMENTS WERE FILED IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND W HETHER THE AO HAD EXAMINED BOTH THESE AGREEMENTS. ON THIS ASPECT, THE LD. CIT DR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO SOME OF THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE LD. CIT IN THE ORDER U/S 263 REGARDING NO MENTION OF ORIGINAL SALE DEED IN R EVISED SALE AGREEMENT. THE LD. CIT DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE SUBSEQUEN T AGREEMENT WAS SUBMITTED ONLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT. THESE FACTS COUL D NOT BE DISPUTED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THUS, HAVING CONS IDERED THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT WHATEVER ARGUMENTS, THE ASSESS EE HAS TO MAKE ON MERIT ON THE CLAIM, THE SAME CAN BE MADE BEFORE THE AO. HOWEVER, AS REGARD TO THE VALIDITY OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 263, WE FIND THAT IT IS ADMITTEDLY A CASE OF LACK OF APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER WHILE FRAMING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AS THE AO HAS NOT C ONSIDERED ALL DOCUMENTS. HENCE, WE DISMISS ALL THE CONTENTIONS RA ISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL. PAGE 3 OF 3 - I.T.A.NO. 199/IND/2009 LATE SHRI ROOPCHAND BHURALAL SONI, UJJAIN 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STA NDS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH JULY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (V. K. GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 14 TH JULY, 2010. CPU* 13147