ITO, New Delhi V. Smt. Sudershana Arora, New Delhi

ITA 4173/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 417320114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 16-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL SINGH
• Keywords: Valuation report
• Section: 143(3); 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4173/DEL/2011 ASSTT. YEAR: 2003-04 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS SMT. SUDE RSHANA ARORA, WARD 24(4), B -6/9, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DELHI. N EW DELHI. (PAN: AAEPA8154H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI SATPAL SINGH, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY: NONE O R D E R PER R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) DATED 02.05.2011. 2. THE ONLY GROUND IN THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS AGAINST DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.77,50,000/-. BRIEF FAC TS OF THE CASE ARE THAT REGULAR ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) WAS PASSED ON 2 8.2.2006. IT IS OBSERVED IN PARA 23 OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX(A) THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS GETTING BARRED BY LIMITATION; THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER EVALUATED THE VALU E OF SHARES OF M/S SJS HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. FOR SUCH PURPOSE, THE VALU E OF LAND WAS TAKEN ITA NO.4173/DEL/2011 ASSTT.YER: 2003-04 2 AT MINIMUM PRICE OF RS. 5000/- SQ. YARD. THE ASSES SING OFFICER HAD REFERRED THE MATTER OF EVALUATION OF LAND TO THE VA LUATION OFFICER, LUDHIANA BEFORE COMPLETING THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT A ND HAD HELD IN HIS ORDER THAT THE SAME WAS BEING PASSED SUBJECT TO THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE DVO. IT IS IN CONSEQUENCE TO THE RECEIPT OF TH E VOS REPORT RECEIVED BY HIM NOW THAT THE VALUE OF LAND HAS BEEN TAKEN AT RS.8000/- PER SQ YARD INSTEAD OF THE ORIGINAL VALUE TAKEN FOR RS.5000/- PER SQ. YARD. BASED ON THIS VALUE OF THE SHARES, THE ASSES SING OFFICER REWORKED AND CONSEQUENTLY MADE A FURTHER ADDITION OF RS.77,5 5,000 WHILE PASSING ORDER U/S 154 AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE PR EFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) WHO ALLOWE D THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. NOW AGAINST THIS ORDER OF COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX(A), THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL. 3. LD. DR HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEA L IS DISPOSED OF AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R AND COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER AND COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), WE FIND THAT AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 154 WHICH WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX(A), THE ITA NO.4173/DEL/2011 ASSTT.YER: 2003-04 3 COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD ALSO FILED APPEAL AGAINST THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) WHICH HAD BEEN DECIDED BY THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 3.11.2009 IN APPEAL NO. 121/06-07. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED BY THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) BY OBSERVING THAT THERE WAS NO IOTA O F EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION THA T ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT HAS BEEN DISCLOSE D IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ANY ESTIMATION FO R MAKING ADDITION U/S 69B OF THE IT ACT, AND FOR EXTENDING THE IMPLIC ATION OF THE EXPRESSION EXPENDED USED IN SECTION 69B, SO FAR A S THE SALE OF THE SHARES IS CONCERNED. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION MAD E IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT BY TAKING THE VALUE OF RS.5000 PER SQ. Y ARD WAS DELETED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). ACCORDINGLY, TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) OBSERVED THAT SINCE THE ORIGINAL O RDER HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE P RESENT RECTIFICATION OF THE SAID ORDER WHICH MERELY GOES ON TO ENHANCE THE VALUE OF THE LAND FOR CALCULATION OF THE VALUE OF SHARES IS ALSO CONSEQUE NTIALLY AND LOGICALLY REQUIRED TO BE DELETED. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS ALSO O BSERVED IN PASSING REFERENCE THAT THE ENHANCEMENT OF INCOME ON THE BAS IS OF VALUATION ITA NO.4173/DEL/2011 ASSTT.YER: 2003-04 4 REPORT OF THE VO IS ITSELF A DEBATABLE ISSUE AND, T HEREFORE, CANNOT FORM PART OF RECTIFICATION PER SE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). THES E FINDINGS OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) REMAIN UNCONTROVERTED AT THE END OF DEPARTMENT AS NEITHER ANY MATERIAL NOR ANY OTHER EV IDENCE WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD TO ESTABLISH OTHERWISE. THE ADDITION MAD E ORIGINALLY HAS ALREADY BEEN DELETED BY THE PREDECESSOR OF THE PRES ENT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) AND, THEREFORE, FURTHER ENHANCING ANY ADDITION WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL WAS ALSO LIABLE TO DELETED WHICH WAS R IGHTLY DELETED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE CON FIRM THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) IN THESE CIRCU MSTANCES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.10.2012. SD/- SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) ( R.K. GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT. 10TH OCTOBER, 2012 GS ITA NO.4173/DEL/2011 ASSTT.YER: 2003-04 5 COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T.(A) 4. C.I.T. 5. DR BY ORDER DY.REGISTRAR