MR.PURSHOTAMDAS GOENKA, MUMBAI V. DCIT CIRCLE 13(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4254/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3790 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KUMAR PADMA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Business income; Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH C, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4254 /MUM/2018 : A.Y : 201 1 - 1 2 MR. PURSHOTAMDAS GOENKA 15, SHIRIN CHAMBERS, 348/50, SAMUEL STREET, VADGADI, MUMBAI 400 003 . PAN : A TWPG3750C (APPELLANT) VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 1 3( 2 ), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SHEKHAR GUPTA REVENUE BY : SHRI KUMAR PADMAPANI BORA DATE OF HEARING : 16/09/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 /09/2019 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN , A.M THE CAPTIONED APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 28 , MUMBAI DATED 02 .0 4 .20 18 , WHICH IN TURN, ARISES OUT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER S ECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 01 .0 3 .20 1 4 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 1 - 1 2 . 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ASSESSED THE INCOME DERIVED FROM SALE OF FLATS UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS INCOME INSTEAD OF CAPITAL GAINS. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE 2 MR. PURSHOTAMDAS GOENKA ITA NO. 4254/MUM/2018 FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INSTANT APPEAL IS IDENTICAL TO THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF MRS. CHANDERKALA GOENKA BEING ITA NO. 2411/MUM/2018 WHICH HAS BEEN DECIDED BY OUR CO - ORDINATE BENCH VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 29.07.2019 AND, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE BE ALSO DISPOSED OF ACCORDINGLY. 3. THE LEARNED DR APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE BUT RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMIS SIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE NOTICE THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL AS THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS IDENTICAL TO THE DISPUTE DECIDED BY OUR CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF MRS. CHANDERKALA GOENKA (SUPRA), THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLO WING THE DECISION IN THE ABOVEREFERRED CASE OF MRS. CHANDERKALA GOENKA (SUPRA), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 0 T H SEPTEMBER, 2019. SD/ - SD/ - (RAM LAL NEGI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( S. RIFAUR RAHMAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 2 0 T H SEPTEMBER, 2019 *SSL* 3 MR. PURSHOTAMDAS GOENKA ITA NO. 4254/MUM/2018 COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, C BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI