Niraj Kumar, , Ranchi V. ITO,Ward-2(1), Ranchi

ITA 293/RAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9617 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 14-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: V K JALAN
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital Gains
• 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.293/RAN/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 NIRAJ KUMAR SRI VINAY KUMAR JALAN, M/S O.P. JALAN & ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS LLP, 48 CART SARAI ROAD, UPPER BAZAR, RANCHI, JHARKHAND, PIN- 834001 [ PAN NO.ALHPK 2024 N ] / V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), RANCHI /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SRI 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 2014-15 , ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-RANCHIS ORDER DATED 07.06.2018 PASSED IN CASE NO.CIT(A), RANCHI/10283/2016-17, INVOLVING PRO CEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE ASSESSEES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE CHALLE NGES CORRECTNESS OF SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS ADDITION OF 8,34,800/- MADE IN BOTH THE LOWER PROCEEDINGS. LEAR NED DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES FAILS TO DISPUTE THAT WHIL ST MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION ITA NO.293/RAN/2018 A.Y. 2014-1 5 SH.NIRAJ KUMAR VS. ITO WD-2(1) RANCHI PAGE 2 GOING BY THE RELEVANT STAMP PRICE OF 17,27,000/- AS AGAINST THE ACTUAL SALE PRICE OF 13,80,000/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE ANY REFERENCE IN TERMS OF SEC. 50C(2) OF THE ACT. THE REVENUES ARGUMENT IN SUPPOR T OF THE IMPUGNED ADDITION IS THAT THE ASSESSEE NEVER RAISED ANY SUCH PLEA BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. I FIND NO SUBSTANCE IN REVENUES INSTANT ARGUMENTS SINCE THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURTS DECISION IN SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL VS. CIT 372 ITR 83 (CAL) HOLDS THAT SUCH A REFERENCE IS VERY MUCH MANDATORY EVEN IF THE TAXPAYERS CONCE RNED DOES NOT RAISE SUCH AN OBJECTION. I THUS RESTORE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFF ICER FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AFRESH AS PER LAW WITHIN THREE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEA RING. 3. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES IN ABOVE TERMS. 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-NIRAJ KUMAR, C/O SRI VINAY KUMAR JALAN, M/S O.P. JALAN & ASSOCIATES CON SULTANTS LLP, 48 CART SARAI ROAD, UPPER BAZAR RANCHI, JHAR KHANT, PIN-834--1 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WARD-2(1), RANCHI 3. ) , / CONCERNED CIT 4. , - / CIT (A) 5. - ) , ) / DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. 1 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY/P.S (ON TOUR) ),