SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, Jaipur V. DCIT, Jaipur

ITA 464/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 46423114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S L PODDAR SHRI D C SHARMA

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. ME ENA) ITA NO. 464/JP/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 PAN : ABYPA 8150 E SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL VS. THE DCIT 27, AGRASEN COLONY CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2 JAIPUR JAIPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.L.PODDAR DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI D.C. SHARMA DATE OF HEARING: 04-08-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 4-08-2014 ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)- CENTRAL, JAIPUR DATED 16-03-2011 FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING SOLI TARY GROUND:- UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION IN ESTIMATING SELLING PRICE OF 2600 SHARES OF M/S. UNI QUE PROPCON (P) LTD. AND 100 SHARES OF M/S. MARUDHARA PROPCON (P) LTD. SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF DLC RATES OF OFFICES PREMISES OWNED BY THESE COMPAN Y AND THEREBY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 2,75,960/- TO THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF CAPITAL GAIN ALLEGEDLY SHORT DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT. 2 2.1 THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS OBJECTING IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION IN ESTIMATING SELLING PRICE OF 2600 SHARES OF M/S. UNIQUE PROPCORN (P) LTD. AND 100 SHARES OF M/S. MAR UDHARA PROPCON (P) LTD. SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE AND AN ADDITION OF RS. 2, 75,960/- HAS BEEN MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF THESE SHARES. DURING THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, INTEREST FROM PARTNERSH IP, CAPITAL GAIN AND OTHER SOURCES. THE RETURN DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 7 ,41,009-/ WAS FILED ON 29-11-2006 BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMP LETED ON AN INCOME OF RS. 10,16,970/- THEREBY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 2 ,75,960/- BY THE AO. HOWEVER, IN FIRST APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIR MED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 2.2 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH ORDER IN THE CASE OF SMT. JAIMALA AGARWAL, WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 465/JP/2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2.3 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR BENCH IN ASSESSEES WIFE SMT. JAIMALA AGARWAL CASE IN ITA NO. 465/JP/2011 DATED 0 2-02-2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WHEREIN ITAT JAIPUR BENCH H AS DELETED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THE OBSERVATION OF ITAT JAIPUR B ENCH IN THE SIMILAR CASE IS AS UNDER:- 3 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESS EE, WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WHICH IS CONF IRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NO LEG TO STAND. ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE SHARES OF A COMPANY AND NOT THE LAND OF THAT COMPANY. THEREFORE, BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE LAND VALUE OWNED BY THAT COMPANY MAKING ANY ADDITIO N IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, IN OUR VIEW IS NOT JU STIFIED. THERE IS NO PROVISION UNDER IT ACT THAT VALUE OF LA ND OWNED BY A COMPANY WHOSE SHARES HAS BEEN GIVEN TO A NY PERSON AND IN THE HAND OF THAT PERSON ANY CAPITAL G AIN CAN BE ASSESSED ON THE BASIS OF LAND OR OFFICE SOLD BY THE COMPANY. IF ANY ADDITION CAN BE MADE THAT CAN BE MA DE ON THE BASIS OF VALUE OF THOSE SHARES OR TAKING INT O CONSIDERATION THAT THE SALE CONSIDERATION SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT CORRECT, IF THERE IS ANY EVIDENCE. NO SUCH MATERIAL WAS THERE BEFORE THE AO THAT ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE SHARES BELOW MARKET PRICE AND THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE BASIS ON WHICH THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY AO WAS NOT CORRECT AND THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF AO. ACCORDINGLY, WE DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION MADE A ND CONFIRMED. THEREFORE, BY RESPECTFULLY THE DECISION OF ITAT BEN CH (SUPRA) AND CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRES ENT CASE, WE DELETE THE 4 IMPUGNED ADDITION CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THUS THE SOLITARY GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04-0 8-2014 SD/- SD/- (T.R. MEENA) (R.P. TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED: 04 AUG. 2014 *MISHRA COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR 2. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR 3. THE LD. CIT 4. THE LD. CIT(A), JAIPUR 5..THE LD. DR 6.THE GUARD FILE (IT NO. 464/JP/2011) BY ORDER AR ITAT, JAIPUR 5 6