A.C.I.T., Circle-3(1), Gwalior V. Smt. Rajesh Gupta, Gwalior

ITA 245/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 24520314 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 22-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2011 ASSTT. YEAR : 2004-05 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE 3(1), VS. SMT. RAJESH GUPTA, GWALIOR. 61, LAXMI BAI COLONY, PADAV, GWALIOR. (PAN : ACOPG 5439 M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANURAG SINHA, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 09.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.04.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GWALIOR DATED 25.03.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 04-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE LAW OF THE CASE THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,21,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN HOUSE PROPERTY . 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.48,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2011 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES AND PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. ON GROUND NO. 1, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS PURCHASED A HOUSE AT 64, LAXMI BAI COLONY, GWALIOR VIDE SALE DEED DATED 19.05.2003 FOR A SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.24,00,000/-. THE REGISTRAR HAS, HOWEVER, CHARGED THE STAMP DUTY ON THE BASIS OF THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPER TY DETERMINED AT RS.39,21,000/-. THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.15,21,000/- WAS TREATED AS PAY MENT MADE TO THE SELLER FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND ADDITION WAS ACCORDINGLY MA DE. THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, DELETED THE ADDITION FINDING THAT THE ADDITION IS N OT BASED ON ANY SEIZED MATERIAL AND THE AO MADE ADDITION MERELY ON PROBABILITIES AN D PRESUMPTIONS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED TH AT THE ITAT, AGRA BENCH IN THE GROUP CASES OF ACIT VS. SHRI PRAVEEN GUPTA AND ACIT VS. SMT. POONAM GUPTA IN ITA NOS. 155 & N156/AGRA/2011 VIDE ORDER DATED 23.0 3.2012, DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL ON THE IDENTICAL ISSUE. THE FIN DING IN PARA 5 OF THE ORDER IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER : 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE D O NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF TH E LD. CIT(A). THE CRUX OF FINDINGS OF THE AO IS THAT THE ADDITION IS MADE BY THE AO MERELY ON THE BASIS OF STAMP VALUATION ADOPTED BY THE REGISTR AR FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION OF THE DOCUMENT. THERE IS NOTHING O N RECORD TO SUPPORT THE FINDING OF THE AO FOR MAKING THE ADDITION ON AC COUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY. THERE IS NO LAW TO JUSTIFY THE FINDINGS OF THE AO TO ADOPT THE STAMP VALUATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2011 3 MAKING ADDITION IN THE CASE OF THE PURCHASER. IT WA S A CASE OF SEARCH AND NOTHING WAS FOUND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IF THE A SSESSEE OR HIS WIFE MADE ANY UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY. ACCORD ING TO THE LD. DR, THE AO HAS NOT INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 50C OF THE IT ACT, BUT NO OTHER PROVISION HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE UNDER WHICH SUCH AN ADDITION CAN BE MADE AGAINST THE ASSE SSEES. IN VIEW OF THE FINDING OF FACT GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT ON RECORD FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING ABOVE ADDITION, WE DO NOT FIND AN Y INFIRMITY OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETI NG THE ADDITION. GROUND NO. 1 OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS NO MERIT AND IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FI ND THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF ITAT, AGR A BENCH IN THE CASE OF SHRI PRAVEEN GUPTA AND SMT. POONAM GUPTA (SUPRA). THE DE PARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT AND IS, ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED ON GROUND NO. 1 . 5. ON GROUND NO. 2, THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE DELE TION OF ADDITION OF RS.48,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED HOUSEHOLD EXP ENSES. THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE AND OTHER G ROUP CASES OF SHRI PRAVEEN GUPTA AND SMT. POONAM GUPTA ETC., DELETED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. IT IS STATED THAT THIS ISSUE IS ALSO CONS IDERED IN THE GROUP CASES OF SRI PRAVEEN GUPTA AND SMT. POONAM GUPTA (SUPRA) AND THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS HAVE BEEN DISMISSED BY ITAT, AGRA BENCH. THE LD. DR ALSO CONCEDED THAT ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. ON CONSIDERATION OF THESE FACTS, WE FIND THAT THE ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2011 4 ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE A BOVE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THUS, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS ALSO NO ME RIT AND IS, ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR TRUE COPY