Mohan Prasad Gupta, Ranchi V. ITO Ward-2(1), Ranchi

ITA 343/RAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8544 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MOHANTI
• Assessee Lawyers: P S PAUL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Fair market value; Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI E-COURTAT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S, GODARA, JM & DR. A.L. SAINI, AM ITA NO.343/RAN/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 MOHAN PRASAD GUPTA C/O D.P. PAUL(FCA), 718/1, NABIN MITRA ROAD, NEAR SAMSUNG PLAZA, BURDWAN COMPOUND, LALPUR, RANCHI- 834001. / V/S . ITO, WARD-2(1), RANCHI PAN NO.ACBPG4107H /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI P.S. PAUL, CA /BY RESPONDENT SHRI A.K. MOHANTI, ADDL. CIT /DATE OF HEARING 14-07-2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14-07-2020 /O R D E R PER S. S. GODARA(ORAL): THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), JHARKHANDS ORDER DATED 30.08.2018 PASSED IN CASE NO.CIT(A),RANCHI/10293/2016-17 INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; (IN SHORT THE ACT). HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERSUED. 2. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT THE SOLE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE RAISED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS THAT OF SECTION 50C HAVING BEEN INVOKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADOPTING STAMP VALUATION RATE OF RS.53,96,040/- RESULTING IN LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS ADDITION OF RS.53,34,419/-; DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT AS UPHELD IN THE CIT(A)S ORDER. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAILS TO REBUT THE CLINCHING FACT THAT NEITHER ITA NO.343/RAN/2018 MOHAN PRASAD GUPTA PAGE 2 OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAD MADE SECTION 50C(2) STATUTORY REFERENCE TO THE DVO BEFORE ADOPTING THE IMPUGNED FAIR MARKET VALUE. HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURTS JUDGMENT IN SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL VS. CIT (2016) 372 ITR 83 (CAL) HOLDS THAT SUCH A REFERENCE IS VERY MUCH MANDATORY MADE EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT RAISE ANY PLEA BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE THEREFORE RESTORE THE ASSESSEES SOLE GRIEVANCE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER MAKING SECTION 50C(2) REFERENCE TO THE DVO. 3. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 14/07/2020. SD/- SD/- (A. L. SAINI) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER KOLKATA; DATE:14/07/2020 RS / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT- MOHAN PRASAD GUPTA 2. /RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD-2(1), RANCHI 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. - / CIT (A) 5. , / DR, ITAT, 6. [ / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER/ , SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY