Mohammad Gulzar , Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 25(3), Kolkata , Kolkata

ITA 363/KOL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8826 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S HALDER
• Assessee Lawyers: M D SHAH LD
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 43CA; 143(3); 50C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM & SHRI S.S. GODARA, JM] I.T.A NO. 363/KOL/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014- 15 MOHAMMAD GULZAR -VS- ITO, WARD-25(3 ), KOLKATA [PAN: AMSPG 8467 F] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI M. D. SHA H, LD. AR FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI S.HALDER, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.12.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.12.2018 ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JM 1. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ARISES AGAINST THE CIT(A)-7, KOLKATAS ORDER DATED 21.12.2017 PASSED IN CASE NO . 109/CIT(A)-7/KOL/WARD-25(3)/16- 17, INVOLVING PROCEEDING U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE ASSESSEES TWIN SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS RAISED I N THE INSTANT APPEAL CHALLENGE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION MAKING SECTION 56(2)(V I) AND SECTION 43CA ADDITION(S) OF RS. 47,55,787/- AND RS. 29,61,278/-; RESPECTIVELY T OTALING TO RS. 77,17,065/-. WE FIND AT THE OUTSET THAT NEITHER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY HAD MADE ANY STATUTORY REFERENCE TO THE DVO U/S 50C(2) R.W.S 56(2)(VI) OF THE ACT BEFORE MA KING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THE REVENUES VEHEMENT CONTENTION BEFORE US DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING IS THAT THE 2 ITA NO.363/KOL/2018 MOHAMMAD GULZAR A.YR.2014-15 2 ASSESSEE HAD NEVER SOUGHT SUCH A REFERENCE BEFORE T HE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE FIND NO MERIT IN ACCEPTING REVENUES INSTANT ARGUMENT. HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DECISION IN SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL VS. CIT (2014) 372 ITR 83 (CAL) HELD THAT THE IMPUGNED NON-OBJECTION OR NOT RAISING SUCH A PLEA A T TAXPAYERS BEHEST FORMS NO GROUND FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR NOT MAKING STATUTORY REFERENCE U/S 50C OF THE ACT. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES ABOUT APPLICATION OF SECTION 50C(2) REFERENCE IN SECTION 56(2)(VI) PROCEEDINGS. WE THEREFORE RESTORE ASSESSEES TWIN GRIEVANCE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION AS PER LAW. SUFFICE TO SAY, ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WOULD BE GRANT ED TO THE TAXPAYER IN CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS. 3. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 28.12.2018 SD/- SD/- [J. SUDHAKAR REDDY] [ S.S.GODARA ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 28.12.2018 SB, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. MOHAMMAD GULZAR, C/O, D.J. SHAH & CO., KALYAN BH AWAN, 2, ELGIN ROAD, KOLKATA- 700020. 2. ITO, WARD-25(3), AAYAKAR BHAWAN DAKSHIN, 2, GARI AHAT ROAD, SOUTH, KOLKATA- 700068. 3..C.I.T(A).- 4. C.I.T.- KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASS ISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES