Dr. R.N. Mahto, Ranchi V. ITO, Ranchi

ITA 22/RAN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9576 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: M K CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Capital asset; Salary income

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 22 /RAN/ 201 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 22 /RAN/201 6 A .Y. : 2010 - 2011 DR. R.N.MAHTO PRINCIPAL, RTC HIGH SCHOOL, BUTI, RANCHI V S ITO, WARD - 2(4) ,RANCHI P AN NO. : ABEPM 6987 D (APPELLANT ) . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K.CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY :SHRI A.K.MOHANTY , JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 2 2 . 05 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.05 .201 8 O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : TH IS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), RANCHI , DATED 30.10.2015 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND : - 1. WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFF ICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITIONS OF RS. 2786704/ - AS INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS IGNORING ALL THE FACTS RELATED WITH THE TRANSFER OF LAND WITHOUT CONSIDERATION AS DONATION TO THE RTC B.ED. COLLEGE AND WITHOUT APPLYING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND LEGAL PRO VISIONS. 2 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A FIRM DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY AND HAS FILED RETURN ON 30.04.2010 SHOWING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,01,742/ - INCLUDING INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, OTHER SOURCES ETC. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCE SSED U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT AND SELECTED FOR 2 ITA NO. 22 /RAN/ 201 6 SCRUTINY UNDER CASS . SUBSEQUENTLY NOTICE U/S.142( 1 ) & 143(2) OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE WAS ISSUED. IN COMPLIANCE THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FILED THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS. THE AO ON PERU SAL OF THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE , MADE ADDITIONS UNDER THE HEADS SALARY, INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND CAPITAL GAIN AND ASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.30,10,490/ - AND PASSED ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT, DATED 28.12.2012. 3 . AGGRIEVED BY THE A SSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE CIT(A). IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THE GROUNDS AND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AND LD.CIT(A) HAVING CONSIDERED THE FINDINGS AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE DEALT ON THE DISPUTED ISSUES AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS OF RS.27,86,704/ - AND PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5 . BEFORE US, LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(E) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF AO IN RESPECT OF SALE DEED WHERE THE AO HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS IN RESPECT OF THE EXECUTION OF SALE DEED. LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE TRANSFER OF LAND TO THE B.ED. COLLEGE W AS MADE ON THREE DATES AS PER THE SALE DEEDS DULY REGISTERED SHOWING THE VALUE OF LAND. THE AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO TRANSACTION OF MONEY WITH REGARD TO 3 ITA NO. 22 /RAN/ 201 6 THE TRANSFER OF LAND AND THE LAND WAS AGRICULTURAL LAND ON WHICH NO CAPITAL GAINS WAS LEV IABLE AND PRAYED FOR ALLOWING THE APPEAL. 6 . CONTRA, LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. 7 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. PRIMA FACIE, THE SOLE CRUX OF THE DISPUTED ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ASSOC IATED WITH TRUST AND THE ASSESSEE HAS EXECUTED A SALE DEED IN RESPECT OF THREE IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES AND IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO A MEMBER OF GAVS WHICH RUNS HIGH SCHOOL AND B.ED. COLLEGE IN RANCHI. THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN SOME LAND TO GAVS ON LEASE AND AS PER THE REQUIREMENT OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS EDUCATION (NCTE), THE PROPERTY WAS REGISTERED BY THE REGISTERED SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE INSTITUTION. THE INSTITUTION HAS CONSIDERED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXECUTED THE SA LE DEED IN RESPECT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE DISPUTED ISSUE ARISES AS THE AO TREATED THE SALE OF LAND AND DETERMINED CAPITAL GAINS AND MADE ADDITION. LD.AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXECUTE D THE SALE DEED BUT THERE IS NO CONSIDERATION RECEIVED AND ALSO SUPPORTED WITH THE PAPER BOOK EXPLAINING THAT THERE IS A DIRECTION OF NCTE AND ALSO MANAGING COMMITTEE HAS MENTIONED THAT THERE IS NO CONSIDERATION WILL BE PAID TO THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD. BUT THE FACTS REMAIN THAT THE SALE DEED HAS NOT BEEN CANCELLED AND THE QUESTION OF ACTUAL INCOME SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. I N THE PRESENT CASE THE LD.AR COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE THAT THE SALE DEED IS WRONGLY EXECUTED BUT THE PRIMA FACIE FACT REMAINS THAT THE 4 ITA NO. 22 /RAN/ 201 6 SALE DEE D CANNOT BE OVERLOOKED AND THE SALE DEED IS A REGISTERED DOCUMENT OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND IS ACCEPTED IN THE EYES OF LAW. THEREFORE, GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO NOT CONSIDERING THE SALE CONSIDERATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. AC CORDINGLY, WE ARE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE ACTION OF AO AS WELL AS CIT(A) AND WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND UPHELD THE SAME AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 8 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 / 05 /201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( N.S.SAINI ) ( PAVAN KUMAR GADALE ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER RANCHI , DATED 30 / 05 /201 8 PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// SR.PS, ITAT, RANCHI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT , CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE.