Shri Kanwar Singh, Rewari V. ITO, Rewari

ITA 3370/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6596 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: NARESH KUMAR AGGARWAL
• Section: 54B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC-I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3370/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 KANWAR SINGH, S/O SHRI RAM, VPO CHANDAWAS DISTRICT, REWARI, PAN: CASPS7200N VS. ITO, WARD-1, REWARI. ITA NO.3371/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 BAHADUR SINGH, S/O SHRI RAM, VPO CHANDAWAS DISTRICT, REWARI, PAN: DGKPS1717P VS. ITO, WARD-1, REWARI. ITA NO.3372/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 RATTAN LAL, S/O SHRI RAM, VPO CHANDAWAS DISTRICT, REWARI, PAN: ADWPL4599C VS. ITO, WARD-1, REWARI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS.3370-3372/DEL/2016 2 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NARESH KUMAR AGGARWAL, ADVOCATE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI F.R. MEENA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 22.02.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.02.2017 ORDER THESE THREE APPEALS BY DIFFERENT, BUT, CONNECTED AS SESSEES RELATE TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. SINCE COMMON ISSUE IS RAISED IN ALL THESE APPEAL S, I AM, THEREFORE, DISPOSING OF THESE APPEALS BY THIS CONSO LIDATED ORDER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS IS AGAINS T THE DENIAL OF DEDUCTION U/S 54B. 4. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF SHRI KANWAR SINGHS CASE ARE THAT HE ALONG WITH HIS THREE BROTHERS SOLD THEIR AG RICULTURAL LAND SITUATED IN VILLAGE QUTABPUR, REWARI FOR A CON SIDERATION OF RS.52,35,000/-. THE ASSESSEES 1/4 TH SHARE IN SALE CONSIDERATION CAME TO RS.13,08,750/-. WHILE COMPUT ING THE ITA NOS.3370-3372/DEL/2016 3 INCOME, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THE BENEFIT U/S 54B AM OUNTING TO RS.12,11,950/-. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE NEW AGRIC ULTURAL LAND WAS PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE NAME OF H IS WIFE AND, HENCE, THE BENEFIT WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THIS ISSUE. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVAN T MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE ALONG WI TH HIS BROTHERS SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND, INCOME FROM WHICH IS OTHERWISE CHARGEABLE TO TAX. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SECTION 54B ON THE PREMISE OF PURCHASING ANOTHER AG RICULTURAL LAND IN THE NAME OF HIS WIFE. THE HONBLE JURISDIC TIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DINESH VERMA (2015) 233 TAXMANN 409 (P&H) , HAS HELD, IN IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 54B CANNOT BE ALLOWED WHEN N EW PROPERTY IS PURCHASED IN THE NAME OF WIFE. IN VIEW OF THE BINDING PRECEDENT AVAILABLE FROM THE HONBLE JURISD ICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THE IMPUGNED ORDER DESERVES TO BE UPHEL D. ITA NOS.3370-3372/DEL/2016 4 6. IT IS COMMON SUBMISSION THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE OTHER TWO APPEALS ARE, MUTATIS MUTANDIS , SIMILAR INASMUCH AS NEW AGRICULTURAL LANDS WERE PURCHASED B Y THE OTHER TWO ASSESSEES ALSO IN THE NAME OF THEIR RESPE CTIVE WIVES. FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN HEREINABOVE, I UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN NOT GRANTING THE BENEFIT U/S 54B OF THE AC T. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED . THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.02.201 7. SD/- [R.S. SYAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 22 ND FEBRUARY, 2017. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.