Saroj Kumar Agarwal, Ranchi V. ITO, Ward-1(1), Ranchi

ITA 246/RAN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0256 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 143(3); 48

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH SMC RANCHI BEFORE SHRI S.S, GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.246/RAN/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 SAROJ KUMAR AGARWAL SRI VINAY KUMAR JALAN, M/S O.P. JALAN & ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS LLP, 48 CART SARAI ROAD, UPPER BAZAAR, RANCHI, PIN-834002 [ PAN NO. AAOPA 7548 R ] / V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), RANCHI CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, 5, MAIN ROAD, RANCHI, PIN-834001 /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI V.K. JALAN, FCA /BY RESPONDENT SRI AJAY KUMAR, ADDL. CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 06-03-2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 06-03-2020 /O R D E R (ORAL) THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 , ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-, RANCHIS ORD ER DATED 14.06.2019 PASSED IN CASE NO.10220/CIT(A)/RANCHI/2017-18, INVOLVING PROC EEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE ASSESSEES SOLITARY SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE CH ALLENGES CORRECTNESS OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION MAKING SEC. 56(2)(VII)(B)( II) ADDITION OF 20,30,000 IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT AND UPHELD IN THE LOWER APPELL ATE PROCEEDINGS. LEARNED COUNSELS FIRST AND FOREMOST CONTENTION IS THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION IS ACTUALLY GAIR ITA NO.246/RAN/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 SAROJ KR. AGARWAL VS. ITO WD-1(1), RNC PAGE 2 MAJARUA MALIK AND THE CORRESPONDING MUTATION HAS AL SO BEEN CANCELLED. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THE LAND IS SITUATED IN VERY LOW LYING AREA WHICH HAS ACTED AS THE BASIC DISTRESSING FACTOR AS WELL. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL RE PRESENTATIVE; ALTHOUGH HAS STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION BUT FAILS TO DISPUT E NEITHER OF LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE DEALT WITH ALL THESE CLINCHING ASPECTS NOR THEY HAV E MADE STATUTORY REFERENCE TO THE DVO U/S 50C(2) OF THE ACT AS APPLICABLE IN SEC. 56( 2)(VII)(B) AS WELL. FACED WITH THE SITUATION, I DEEM IT APPROPRIATE NOT TO RESTORE THE INSTANT TECHNICAL ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT CONCLUDE THAT A LUMP SUM VALU ATION ADDITION OF 3 LAKH OUT OF 20,30,000 WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WITH A RID ER THAT SAME SHALL NOT TREATED AS A PRECEDENT IN ANY CASE. NECESSARY COMPUTATION INCLUD ING THAT OF INTEREST SHALL FOLLOW AS PER LAW. 3. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT AT THE CLOSE OF HEAR ING ON FRIDAY , 6 TH MARCH, 2020 SD/ - ( #) (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEM BER *DKP/SR.PS % - 06/03/2020 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-SAROJ KR. AGARWAL SRI VINAY KR. JALAN, M /S O.P. JALAN & ASSOCIATES CON SULTANTS LLP, 48 CART SARAI ROAD, UPPER BAZAAR RANCHI-834001 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WD-1(1), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, 5, MAIN ROAD, RANCHI 3. ) , / CONCERNED CIT 4. , - / CIT (A) 5. - ) , ) / DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. 1 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY/P.S (ON TOUR) ),