Shri Vanmalibhai Zaverbhai Patel, Mehsana V. The Income Tax Officer, Patan Ward-4, Mehsana

ITA 3315/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1362 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITA HARDASANI
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: S H RI PRAMOD KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER VANMALIBHAI ZAVERBHAI PATEL, AT JAYDEVPURA, KADI, MEHSANA, GUJARAT - 382715 PAN: BNWPP7726A (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, PATAN, WARD - 4, MEHSANA (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI ANITA HARDASANI , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI PRITESH SHAH , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 11 - 05 - 2 016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 - 06 - 2 016 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2012 - 13 , AR IS ES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR DATED 07 - 09 - 2015 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)/GNR/1 7 9/2014 - 15 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T A NO . 3315 / A HD/20 15 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 I.T.A NO. 3315 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 2012 - 13 PAGE NO VANMALIBHAI ZAVERBHAI PATEL VS. ITO 2 2. THIS APPEAL RAISES THE FOLLOWING SUBSTANT IVE GROUNDS: - 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF RS. 4,53,905/ - U/S. 57(IV) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WHICH IS REQUESTED TO BE DELETED. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON F ACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF BANK INTEREST OF RS. 14,503/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME, WHICH IS REQUESTED TO BE DELETED. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,50,000/ - AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR RATE PURPOSE, WHICH IS REQUESTED TO BE DELETED. LEARNED AUTHORIZED R EPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT PRESS FOR LATTER TWO GROUNDS IN THE COURSE OF HEARING SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE S AME ARE NOT TREATED AS A PRECEDENT IN ANY PRECEDING OR SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. HE CITES SMALLNESS OF THE AMOUNT S INVOLVED AS REASON S THEREOF. THE REVENUE DOES NOT OBJECT. WE ACCORDINGLY REJECT THE ASSESSEE S LATTER TWO GROUNDS AS NOT PRESSED. THIS LEAVES US WITH THE ADJUDICATION OF FIRST SUBS TA NTIVE GROUND ONLY. 3. THE ASSESSEE - IN DIVIDUAL DERIVES INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. HE FILED RETURN ON 30 - 11 - 2013 ADMITTING INCOME OF RS. 2,0 4,818/ - . THE SAME STOOD PROCESSED . THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK UP SCRUTINY THEREAFTER. THE ASSESSEE HAD DERIVED INTEREST INCOME IN LIEU OF LAND ACQUISIT ION COMPENSATION RECEIVED FROM ONGC. HE DECLARED INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 2,26,956/ - AS AGAINST GROSS INTEREST RECEIPT OF RS. 13,61,719/ - . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CLA IMED EXPENDITURE OF R S. 11,34,765/ - AS PAID TO SEVERAL FAMILY MEMBERS. THE ASSESSING I.T.A NO. 3315 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 2012 - 13 PAGE NO VANMALIBHAI ZAVERBHAI PATEL VS. ITO 3 OFFICER IN ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 07 - 10 - 2014 QUOTED SECTION 57(IV) OF THE ACT TO OBSERVE THAT MAXIMUM DEDUCTION IN SUCH A CASE IS ADMISSIBLE @ 50% ONLY. HE COMPUTED THE IMPUGNED DI SALLOWANCE OF RS. 4,53,905/ - I. E. CLAIM SUM OF RS. 11,34,765/ - - 50% OF GROSS INTER EST RECEIPT COMING TO RS. 6,80,860/ - THEREBY MAKING THE ADDITION IN QUESTION IN ASSSESSEE S HANDS. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMS ASSESSING OFFICER S ACTION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. CASE FILE PERUSED. THE ASSESSEE INTER ALIA SUBMITS HIS LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI ZAVERBHAI PATEL EXPIRED ON 08 - 09 - 2008 LEAVING BEHIND SIX LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES INCLUDING HIS FIVE SISTERS. ALL OF THEM ARE ENTITLED FOR 1/6 TH SHARE EACH IN GROSS INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 13,61,718/ - (SUPRA). LD. AUTHORIZED R EPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES DEDUCTED TDS THEREUPON IN HIS SOLE NAME ONLY. HE TAKES US TO RESPECTIVE RETURN OF ALL SIX LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES FORMING PART OF THE CASE FILE IN LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. IT IS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE DISTRIBUTED INTERES T INCOME OF RS. 11,34,765/ - IN QUESTION TO HIS FIVE SISTER @ 2,26,953/ - EACH THEREBY RAISING THE IMPUGNED EXPENDITURE CLAIM. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT HIS FIVE SISTERS ALREADY STAND ASSESSED QUA RESPECTIVE INTEREST INCOME SHARE AND THE SAME IS DOUBLY TAXE D IN HIS CASE. THE REVENUE IS UNABLE TO REBUT THIS FACTUAL POSITION. IT CONTENDS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THESE DETAILS IN THE INSTANT PROCEEDINGS ONLY. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO RIVAL CONDITIONS. THE ASSESSEE S ONLY CASE IS THAT IT S A CASE OF DOUBLE TAXATION SINCE HIS SISTERS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED QUA THE I.T.A NO. 3315 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 2012 - 13 PAGE NO VANMALIBHAI ZAVERBHAI PATEL VS. ITO 4 IMPUGNED INTEREST INCOME. OUR VIEW IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IS THAT THIS ISSUE RAISED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE US REQUIRES FACTUAL VERIFICATION FROM THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AS PER LAW. WE ACCORDINGLY REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR NECESSARY VERIFICATION. IT GOES WITHOUT ANY FURTHER GAINSAYING THAT THE SAME INCOME CANNOT BE DOUBLY TAXED FIRST IN ASSESSEE S SISTERS CASES FOLLO WED BY ITS ASSESSMENT IN HIS HANDS. THIS FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 16 - 06 - 201 6 SD/ - SD/ - ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 16 /06 /2016 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,