Shri Adarsh Kumar Swarup, Muzaffarnagar V. CIT (A), Muzaffarnagar

ITA 4344/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3830 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AGAINST IMPUGNED DATED PASSED
• Section: 54

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.:-4344/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.12.2015, PASSED BY LD. CIT(A PPEALS) MUZAFFARNAGAR IN RELATION TO THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U /S 271(1)(C) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE ASSESSEE IS MAINLY A GGRIEVED BY LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS. 17,12,000/- ON DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 54. ADARSH KUMAR SWARUP RAMBAGH, JANSATH ROAD, MUZAFFARNAGAR PAN AGIPS9620C VS. CIT(A) MUZAFFARNAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI M.P. RASTOGI, ADVOCATE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAVI KANT GUPTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 22/01/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24/01/2018 ITA NO. 4344/DEL/2016 ADARSH KUMAR SWARUP VS. CIT 2 2. AT THE OUTSET THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SHRI M.P. RASTOGI SUBMITTED THAT IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, THE SAID ADDITION WHICH WAS ON ACCOUNT OF ENHANCEMENT MADE BY THE LD. CI T (A) HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1228/DEL/201 6 VIDE ORDER DATED 28 TH MARCH, 2017. THUS, THE PENALTY ON SAID ADDITION DOE S NOT SURVIVE. LD. SR. DR ALSO ADMITTED THAT THE QUANTUM HAS B EEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE PENALTY IS ALSO LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE AFORESAID FACT PLACED BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT HERE IN THIS CASE THE TRIBUNAL HAS DELETED THE DIS ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 54 WHICH WAS ON ACCOUNT OF ENHANCEMENT M ADE BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS. THE RELEVAN T CONCLUSION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THIS REGARD READS AS UNDER:- 8.6 IN THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS NOT THE CASE OF AO AND CIT (APPEALS) THAT THE LAND WAS NOT APPURTENANT TO THE RESIDENTIAL HOU SE. THE CASE OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD ONLY TH E LAND APPURTENANT TO THE HOUSE AND NOT RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WHICH, ACCORDIN G TO THE KAMATAKA HIGH COURT, IS NOT A REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW AND EXEMPTION U/S. 54 OF THE ACT IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO THE LAND WHICH IS A PPURTENANT TO THE HOUSE. THE FRONT PAGE OF THE SALE DEED ITSELF SHOWS THAT THE LAND WAS PART OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSE NO. 64 AGRASEN VIHAR, MUZ AFFARNAGAR. THEREFORE, THE EXEMPTION AS CLAIMED AND ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD BE UPHELD AND THE ENHANCEMENT AS MAD E BY THE CIT (APPEALS) IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW, HE NCE, THE SAME IS DELETED. ITA NO. 4344/DEL/2016 ADARSH KUMAR SWARUP VS. CIT 3 3. ACCORDINGLY, PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) ON SUCH DISALLOW ANCE MADE BY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOW NO LEGS TO STAND AND THEREFORE , SAME IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 4. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH JANUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (O.P. KANT) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 24 /01/2018 VEENA COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI