ITO, New Delhi V. Smt. Jasjiwan Kaur, New Delhi

ITA 283/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 114 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8013 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 29-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 1993-1994
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV DUDEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: SONIA MATHUR
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Set aside
• Section: 50C; 56(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU: JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 283/DEL/2009 ASSTT. YR: 1993-94 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VS. SMT. JASJIWAN KAUR, WARD 24(2), NEW DELHI. 57, UDAY PARK, NEW DELHI. PAN: AGKPK 8878 J ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI GAURAV DUDEJA SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SONIA MATHUR ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 29/06/2015. DATE OF ORDER : 01/07/2015. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M: THIS APPEAL, PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE , IS DIREC TED AGAINST CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 25-11-2008 RELATING TO A.Y. 2005-06. EFFECT IVE GROUNDS RAISED ARE AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 9 LAKHS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE AC T DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BROUGHT FULL FA CTS OF THECAE ON RECORD. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO RS . 23745/- AS AGAINST RS. 1,45,138/- MADE UNDER THE HEAD INTEREST INCOME. 2 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO RS. 80000/- AS AGAINST RS. S27,20,375/- MADE UNDER THE HEAD UNSECU RED LOANS RAISED DURING THE YEAR. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 2,08,800/-. ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 40,86,232/-, INTER ALIA, MAKING AN AD DITION OF RS. 27,20,375/- IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOANS. LD. CIT(A) SUBSTANTI ALLY ACCEPTED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE AMOUNT OF RS. 26,40,37 5/- FROM THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 27,20,375/-, LEAVING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 80,000 /- BEING THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION SUSTAINED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHE R SOURCES. THEREAFTER THE MATTER TRAVELLED TO ITAT AND THE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 13-8-2010 MODIFIED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO RE CEIPT OF RS. 2.35 LACS FROM J. GURMEET SINGH AND RS. 7,13,375/- FROM KANWAL RAT TAN AND HELD THAT THESE TWO AMOUNTS WERE ALSO HIT BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 56(2) IN ADDITION TO RS. 80,000/- CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A). 2.1. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE HONBLE H IGH COURT AND THE HONBLE HIGH COURT VIDE ITS JUDGMENT DATED 30-5-201 2 HAS REMITTED THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ITAT OBSERVING AS UNDER: 4. IT APPEARS FROM PARAGRAPHS 14 OF THE IMPUGNED O RDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL THAT TH E ADDITION HAS PRIMARILY BEEN MADE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSE SSEE COULD NOT SHOW THAT THE LOANS HAD, IN FACT, BEEN REPAID B Y THE ASSESSEE. ANOTHER ASPECT OF THE MATTER WHICH WAS CONSIDERED B Y THE TRIBUNAL WAS THAT SINCE NO INTEREST WAS PAID ON THE PURPORTED LOANS, THE SAID AMOUNTS WERE TO BE REGARDED AS PAYM ENTS RECEIVED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION. 5. WE FEEL THAT THE ASSESSEES ASSERTION THAT SHE H AD REPAID THE LOANS OUGHT TO BE EXAMINED BY THE TRIBUNAL. SIN CE THE 3 MATERIAL WITH REGARD TO THE REPAYMENT OF THE LOAN W AS NOT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES MENTIONED ABOVE, WE FEEL THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IF THE IMPUGNED O RDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE TRIBUNAL TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH. LIBERTY IS, HOWEVER, GRANTED TO THE A SSESSEE TO FILE/ PRODUCE EVIDENCE OF REPAYMENT OF THE SAID LOANS. TH E SAME, IF FILED/ PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE, SHALL BE CONSIDERE D BY THE TRIBUNAL AND AN APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WIT H LAW, AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, WOULD BE PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 6. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE TRIBUNAL. IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, THE PARTIES SHALL APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 10-07-2012. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THI S IS A CASE OF A SENIOR CITIZEN AND WAR WIDOW OF 1971 WAR. SHE SUBMITTED TH AT IN VIEW OF LIBERTY GRANTED BY HONBLE HIGH COURT, THE ASSESSEE IS FILI NG EVIDENCE OF REPAYMENT OF THE SAID LOANS BY FILING PAPER BOOK DATED 20-3-2 014 CONTAINING 19 PAGES. SHE SUBMITTED THAT ADMITTEDLY THESE PAPERS WERE NOT EARLIER FILED AND, THEREFORE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE F ILE OF AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF OBSERVATIONS MADE BY HONBLE HIGH COURT REGARDING REPAYMENT OF THE SAID LOANS. SHE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THIS BEING A CASE OF SENIOR CITIZEN, TIME BOUND DIRECTIONS MAY B E GIVEN TO THE AO FOR COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT. 4. LD. DR FAIRLY AGREED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REST ORED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. HOWEVER, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO IS TO BE G OVERNED BY THE LIMITATION AS PER THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PE RUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS AGREED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, WE RESTORE THIS MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO FOR EXAMINING THE PAPERS FILED BY AS SESSEE BEFORE US IN THE FORM OF PB DATED 20-3-2014 CONTAINING 19 PAGES TO F IND OUT WHETHER THE 4 LOANS WERE REPAID OR NOT AND THEN TO DECIDE THE ISS UE AS PER THE OBSERVATIONS OF HONBLE HIGH COURT NOTED SUPRA. 6. FURTHER AS FAR AS REQUEST OF LD. COUNSEL FOR GI VING DIRECTION TO THE AO FOR EXPEDITING THE ASSESSMENT, WE FEEL THAT KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT THAT THE CASE IS LINGERING SINCE LONG AND IS A CASE OF SENIO R CITIZEN, WHO IS A WAR WIDOW, AS STATED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, W E HOPE THAT AO WOULD EXPEDITE THE ASSESSMENT WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. 7. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 01, 07,2015. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 01-07-2015. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR (ITAT)