Balwinder Kaur, Jalandhar V. The Income Tax Officer, Jalandhar

ITA 513/ASR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9577 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 54F; 147; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.513(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 PAN :ABAPK1857F SMT. BALWINDER KAUR, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, W/O SH. RANJIT SINGH WARD III(3), JALANDHAR. 38, CIVIL LINE, JALANDHAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN, DR DATE OF HEARING: 14/09/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16/09/2016 ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-2, JALANDHAR, DATED 21.08.2015 RELATING TO A SSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSM ENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE I.T. ACT, 19 61. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE AS SESSEE WAS MAINTAINING BANK ACCOUNT WITH CENTURIAN BANK OF PUN JAB LTD., WHEREIN CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.11,84,000/- WAS MADE. IT WAS ALS O OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD HER SHARE IN A PROPERTY AT G. T. ROAD, JALANDHAR FOR ITA NO.513/ASR/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 2 A TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS.1,12,00,000/-. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON THE SALE OF THE SAID PROPERTY WAS MORE THAN THE INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE CAS E OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 3. BEFORE THE AO, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD CORRECTLY DECLARED INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAIN IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME AND THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL PROP ERTY FOR RS.1,47,00,000/- AND HAD AVAILED DEDUCTION UNDER S ECTION 54F OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED COPIES OF PURCHASE DEE DS DATED 06.02.2006 AND 21.08.2006. HOWEVER, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE P URCHASE DEEDS WERE FOR PURCHASE OF PIECES OF LAND AND NOT THE RESIDEN TIAL HOUSES, AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS AGAIN ASKED TO FILE EVIDENCE OF CONSTRUCTION MADE ON THE PROPERTY PURCHASED FOR AVAILING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. BUT THERE WAS NO COMP LIANCE AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE A CT ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THEREFORE, THE AO COMPLETE D THE ASSESSMENT AFTER MAKING ADDITION OF RS.11,84,000/-, AS UNDISCL OSED BANK DEPOSITS AND ALSO COMPUTED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN TO THE EXT ENT OF RS.65,03,059/. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE FILED APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE ON THE BASIS ITA NO.513/ASR/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 3 OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, AS THE ASSESSE E DID NOT UTILIZE THE OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN VIDE VARIOUS NOTICES TO EXPLAIN HER CASE. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS BENCH. 6. BEFORE US, AN APPLICATION DATED 14.09.2016 FOR A DJOURNMENT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. BUT GOING THROUGH THE MATER IAL ON RECORD, WE FOUND THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE CAN BE DISPOSED OF EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE LD. AR. THEREFORE, THE ADJOURNMENT A PPLICATION WAS REJECTED AND THE LD. DR WAS HEARD. WE FIND THAT THE MAIN ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE IS WITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF THE A SSESSEE REGARDING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 54F OF THE ACT. THE ASSESS MENT IN THIS CASE WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN HER ENTITLEMENT FOR EXEMPTION U/S 54F O F THE ACT. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE RELEVA NT DOCUMENTS FOR HER CLAIM. THOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN FAIR NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASONS BEST KNOWN TO HER DID NOT ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT REQUEST WAS FILED WITH THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) DISPOSED OF T HE APPEAL EX-PARTE. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHO WILL AFFORD DUE AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN ENT ITLEMENT FOR HER CLAIM UNDER SECTION 54F AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE I N ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME TO EXPLAIN HER CASE AS RIGHTS AND D UTIES GO SIDE BY SIDE. ITA NO.513/ASR/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 4 THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE GRANTED RIGHT OF HEARING WIT HOUT COMPLETING HER PART OF DISCHARGING THE RESPONSIBILITY. THE ASSESSE E SHOULD UTILIZE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN HER CASE, OTHERWISE THE PRE SUMPTION WILL GO AGAINST HER. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ASSESSES APPEAL IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/09/201 6. SD/- SD/- (N.K. CHOUDHRY) (T.S. KAPOOR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /SKR/ DATED: 16/09/2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SMT. BALWINDER KAUR W/O SH. RANJIT SIN GH, JALANDHAR. 2. THE ITO WARD III(3), JALANDHAR. 3. THE CIT(A), JALAHDHAR. 4. THE CIT, JALANDHAR. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.