ITO, JHALAWAR V. SHRI. CHIRANJIV LAL KACHOLIYA, Kota

ITA 278/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 27823114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D C SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: C M BIRLA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Opportunity of being heard; Fair market value; Valuation report

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL : JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO. 181/JP/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) PAN NO. ASJPK 5477 A CHIRANJIV LAL KACHOLIA, VS. DEPARTMENTAL VALUATIO N POST OFFICE ROAD, OFFICER, AJMER. BHAWANIMANDI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 278/JP/2012 (A.Y. 2007-08) PAN NO. ASJPK 5477 A ITO, JHALAWAR. VS. SHRI CHIRANJIV LAL KACHOLIY A, POST OFFICE ROAD, BHAWANIMANDI, RAJASTHAN. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.M. BIRLA. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI D.C. SHARMA - D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 31/01/2014. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31/01/2014. 2 O R D E R PER N.K.SAINI, A.M THESE TWO CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE DE PARTMENT ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25/01/2012 OF LD. CIT(A), KOTA. IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE FOLLOWING GROU NDS HAVE BEEN RAISED:- 1. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE LEARNED DVOS ACTI ON IN TAKING DLC RATE AS FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PLOT IS NOT AR BITRARY AND VIOLATIVE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. 2. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE LD. CIT(A) ALSO ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION FOR TIME GAP IGNORING THAT DLC RATE OF RS. 2905/- WAS PREVAILING ON 20/09/2006 ALS O WHICH WAS ADOPTED BY STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITIES ALSO. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, A MEND, MODIFY AND/OR OTHERWISE SUBSTITUTE ANY OF THE FOREGOING GR OUNDS AS AND WHEN REQUIRED. THE GROUND RAISED IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL READS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- (I) ACCEPTING THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST VALUATION REPORT OF THE VALUATION OFFICER WHICH IS NOT AN APPEALABLE ORDER. (II) TREATING THE VALUATION REPORT AS AN ORDER U/S 50C(2 ) OF THE I.T. ACT. (III) REJECTING THE REPORT OF DVO WITHOUT AFFORDING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO DVO, THEREBY VIOLATIN G THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 23A(6)(A) OF W.T. ACT. (IV) WORKING OUT THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT RS. 2,440/ - PER SQ.FT. AS AGAINST RS. 2,905/- PER SQ.FT. DETERMINED BY THE DVO. 3 (V) REDUCING THE FAIR VALUE OF THE PROPERTY DETERMINED BY THE VALUATION OFFICER AND ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT. (VI) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO RAISE ADDITIONAL GR OUND AND TO MODIFY/AMEND THE GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HE ARING. 2 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT BOTH THE AS SESSEE AND THE DEPARTMENT HAVE FILED ANOTHER SET OF APPEALS IN I.T .A.NO. 180/JP/2012 AND I.T.A.NO. 279/JP/2012 RESPECTIVELY FOR THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR, SO, THESE APPEALS BECOME INFRUCTUO US IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH, JIAPU R IN I.T.A.NO. 249/JP/2012 BY THE ASSESSEE AND IN I.T.A.NO. 282/JP /2012 BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAMESHWAR PRASHAD KA CHOLIA VS. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA. COPY OF THE SAID ORDER D ATED 24/05/2013 WAS FURNISHED. 3. THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE WAS ENDORSED BY THE LD. D.R. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO OR DER DATED 24/05/2013 OF THE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAMESHWAR PRASAD KACHOLIA VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA. IN THE SAID 4 ORDER, THE RELEVANT FINDING HAS BEEN GIVEN IN PARA 8, WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 8. HAVING ANSWERED THE ISSUE SUBSTANTIVELY IN THE AFORESAID APPEAL NOS. 248/JP/2012 AND 286/JP/2012 AND CONSIDE RING THE RULE POSITION AS CONTAINED IN INCOME-TAX RULES AND PROFORMA PROVIDED IN FORM NO. 35 IN APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) WHE RE SPECIFIC COLUMN HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR MAKING AN APPEAL AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF VALUATION OFFICER, THE RENDERING OF DECISI ON BY LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THE ORDER OF VALUATION OFFICER AND I N THE ABSENCE OF ANY MANDATORY PROVISION UNDER THE I.T. ACT, HAVI NG BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE, HIS SUCH A DECISION CANNOT B E TAKEN AS LEGALLY CORRECT. THESE APPEALS, HOWEVER, HAVE BECO ME INFRUCTUOUS IN THE LIGHT OF OUR DECISION IN AFORESA ID APPEALS IN ITA NOS. 248/JP/2012 AND 286/JP/2012. ACCORDINGLY BOTH THE APPEALS IN ITA NO. 249/JP/2012 AND 282/JP/2012 STAN D DISMISSED. 5. IT IS ALSO RELEVANT TO POINT OUT THAT IDENTICAL IS SUES WERE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE DEPARTMENT IN THE AF ORESAID APPEALS FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08, SO BY RESPECTFULLY FO LLOWING THE SAID ORDER IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAMESHWAR PRASAD KACHOLIA VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, THESE APPEALS ARE CONSIDERED AS INF RUCTUOUS. 6 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 31 ST JANUARY, 2014). SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (N.K.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 31 ST JANUARY, 2014. 5 VR/- COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE LD.CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, JAIPUR.