The ITO, Ward-6(2), Ahmedabad V. Shri Govindbhai Ramanlal Chaudhary, Ahmedabad

ITA 2124/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1070 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 25-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINESH SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: PRADEEP TULSIAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.2124/AHD/2012 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2009-2010 ITO, WARD - 6(2) AHMEDABAD. VS GOVINDBHAI RAMANLAL CHAUDHRY 1/106/1263, SHREE NAGAR APARTMENT SOLA ROAD AHMEDABAD 380 063. PAN : AAHPC 0832 H ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI DINESH SINGH, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRADEEP TULSIAN, AR / DATE OF HEARING : 22/06/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18/07/2016 $%/ O R D E R THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-XI, AHMEDABAD DATED 9.7.2012 PASSED FOR T HE ASSTT.YEAR 2009-10. 2. SOLITARY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD .CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.42,35,000/- WHICH HAS B EEN ADDED BY THE AO ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THELD.AO GOT IN FORMATION FROM AIR WING EXHIBITING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD LAND WITH OTHER CO-OWNERS FOR A SUM OF RS.72.50 LAKHS. IT EMERGES FROM RECORD THAT FOUR PERSONS HAVE SOLD THIS LAND. THE ASSESSEE HAD 10% SHARES. THE SHARE OF CONSIDERATION CAME TO THE ASSESSEE WAS RS.6.05 LAKHS AND ADDITION WAS MAD E TO THIS EFFECT. THE LD.AO THEREAFTER OBSERVED THAT SMT.CHAMPABEN S. RAB ARI AND CHUDABHAI ITA NO.2124/AHD/2012 2 LAXMANBHAI DESAI WERE HAVING 50% AND 20% OF THE SHA RE RESPECTIVELY. THEY DO NOT HAVE PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBERS, NOR HAVE THE Y FILED INCOME TAX RETURNS. THEREFORE, THE SHARE OF PROFIT OF SALE OF LAND IS TO BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE LD.C IT(A). 4. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE RECORD, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS A CLASSIC CASE OF INSENSIBILITY AND NON-APPLICATION O F MIND AT THE END OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER WHO HAVE AUTHORIZED TO FILE THE APPEAL. HOW THE ASSESSEE CAN BE HELD LIABLE FOR PAYMENT OF CAPITAL TAXES OR ANY OTHER TAXES ON THE TRANSACTIONS WHICH WERE IN THE NAMES OF OTHER A SSESSEES. THE AO HAS NOT HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS THE BENAMIDHAR OF THE ALLEGED TWO VENDORS. INSTEAD OF VERIFYING THIS FACT, APPEAL HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED TO THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DELETED THIS ADDIT ION ON THIS VERY GROUND. HENCE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL. IT IS DISM ISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 18 TH JULY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 18/07/2016