ITO, Ward-7(1)(3), Ahmedabad V. Shri Jayantilal Ishwarlal Patel, Ahmedabad

ITA 3451/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1704 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 05-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAURYA SHUKLA
• Assessee Lawyers: JAYANTILAL I PATEL
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 2(14)

Judgement Text

ITA NO.3451/AHD/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3451/AHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. JAYANTILAL ISHWARLAL PATE L, WARD 7(1)(3), AHMEDABAD. 4, SUBHADA SOCIETY, NR. JODHPUR GAM, SATELLITE ROAD, AHMEDABAD. [PAN ACPPP 7410 A] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAURYA SHUKLA, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JAYANTILAL I. PATEL, AS SESSEE DATE OF HEARING : 05.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.05.2016 O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL. FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE RA ISED : 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS I N DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.28,68,820/- MADE BY IGNORING THE REASONS GIVEN B Y THE AO IN SUPPORT OF THE DISALLOWANCE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE RATE OF RS.1270/- PER SQ. MTR. VALUED BY THE REGISTERED VAL UER APPOINTED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHEREAS IN THE TWO SALE INSTANCES QUOTED BY THE SAME VALUER IN THE NEARBY LOCALITY WERE RS.340 PER SQ. MTR. AND 389 PER. SQ. MTR. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN TREATING THE LAND SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE AS AGRICULTURAL LAND AS THE SAME IS WI THIN THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF AHMEDABAD AND IT CANNOT BE TREATED AS AGR ICULTURAL LAND IN VIEW OF PROVISION OF SECTION 2(14) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 4. IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED TO THE ABOVE EXTENT. ITA NO.3451/AHD/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-. IN VIEW OF THIS UNDISPUTED FACT AN D IN THE LIGHT OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN FOR T HE SIMPLE REASON THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. (THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON T HE 5 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016.) SD/- SD/- N.K. BILLAIYA R.P. TOLANI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 5 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDE NT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FIL E BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD