B U Bhandari Real Estates, Pune V. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Pune

ITA 312/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves B.U. Bhandari Real Estates appealing against the order of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Pune, which was passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the lack of enquiry by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding negative balances in the partners' capital accounts and unverified sales transactions. The Tribunal noted that the AO had not examined these issues during the original assessment, leading to the PCIT's intervention. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the PCIT's order, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the highlighted discrepancies.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 132825 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Assessment record; Set aside
• Section: 263; 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.312/PUN/2022 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 B.U. Bhandari Real Estates, 1182/1/3, First Floor, B U Bhandari, FC Road, Shivajinagar, Pune -411005 PAN : AAGFB9522L .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Pune ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : N O N E Revenue by : Shri Keyur Patel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 01-02-2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 02-02-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 25-03-2022 passed u/s. 263 of the Act by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Pune (“PCIT”) for assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find that the Registry, ITAT, Pune issued notice dated 28-12- 2022 by RPAD intimating the date of fixation of hearing on 11-01-2023. The said notice was received by the assessee proof of receipt of notice is on record by way of acknowledgment. On perusal of the ordersheet, we note on 11-01-2023, the assessee called absent and the appeal was adjourned to 01-02-2023. Again, Registry, ITAT, Pune issued another notice dated 2 ITA No.312/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 19-01-2023 by RPAD to the assessee intimating the date of fixation of hearing of the appeal on 01-02-2023. Today, again we find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. Thus, the assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal by hearing the ld. DR and perusing the material available on record. 3. The only issue is to be decided is as to whether the PCIT justified in holding the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue for lack of enquiry. 4. We note that on an examination of the assessment record, the PCIT found negative balances in the current capital account belonging the partners Shri Anuj M. Bhandari and Shri Rajnish M. Bhandari. According to the PCIT, the said negative balances is Rs.88,98,303/- and charged interest on the same, but however, offered to tax only Rs.66,82,953/-. The AO did not examine the details of such negative balances. Further, the assessee recognized sales to the extent of Rs.29,24,81,072/- towards sale of flats, but however, no details whatsoever were furnished in respect of agreement value and stamp duty value. The ld. DR, Shri Keyur Patel drew our attention to the assessment order and vehemently argued that the AO failed to conduct enquiry on the two issues raised by the PCIT in revision proceedings. Further, he also drew our attention to the impugned order and argued that the PCIT validly invoked jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act and found no enquiry conducted by the AO on the issues of negative balances and details in respect of agreement value and stamp duty value. According to the PCIT, there was no enquiry by the AO in this regard. On perusal of the assessment record, we note that the AO made no discussion or reference in the assessment proceedings regarding these two issues. 3 ITA No.312/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 Therefore, it amply establishes the finding of PCIT that there was no enquiry at all on these two issues is correct. On perusal of paras 9 and 10 of the impugned order, we note that the PCIT set aside the order passed by the AO u/s. 143(3) of the Act by holding the same as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue, remanded the matter to the file of AO for necessary examination, verification and enquiries in respect of above referred issues. It is also noted that the PCIT clearly directed the AO to give adequate opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of PCIT and it is justified. There is no prejudice caused to the assessee by the order of PCIT. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 02 nd February, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनाांक / Dated : 02 nd February, 2023. रदव आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT (Central), Pune 4. The Addl. CIT, Range-2, Pune 5. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. //सत्यादपत प्रदत// True Copy// आिेशानुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ दनजी सदचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune