DCIT 22(2), NAVI MUMBAI V. NANDITA MIRANI, MUMBAI

ITA 5172/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0050 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS JYOTILAKSHMI NAYAK
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JM) I.T.A. NO. 5172 /MUM/ 2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06 - 07 ) CIT - 22(2) TOWER NO. 6 4 TH FLOOR VASHI RAILWAY STATION BLDG VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI. VS. MS. NAND ITA MIRANI BUNGALOW NO. 3 JIMMYS NEST DREAM LAND CHS LTD. DR. SOARES ROAD CHEMBUR MUMBAI - 400 071. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO . AADPM6823D ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY MRS. JYOTILAKSHMI NAYAK DATE OF HEARING 22 .3 . 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUN CEMENT 22 .3 . 201 7 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM) : - THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 15 - 05 - 2012 PASSED BY LD CIT(A) - 33, MUMBAI DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS.10,10,249/ - LEVIED BY THE AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE BY RPAD. HENCE WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE, WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD LD D.R AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE FACT S RELATING TO THE CASE ARE DISCUSSED IN BRIEF. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE SOLD AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FOR A SUM OF RS.5.00 LAKHS AND ACCORDINGLY OFFERED CAPITAL GAIN THEREON BY TAKING THE SALE CONSIDERATION AS RS.5.00 LAKHS. THE AO MS. NANDITA MIRANI 2 NOTICED THAT THE STAMP DUTY VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY STOOD AT RS.50,02,000/ - AND HENCE HE RECOMPUTED THE CAPITAL GAIN BY ADOPTING THE SALE CONSIDERATION AS RS.50,02,000/ - IN TERMS OF SEC. 50C OF THE ACT. LATER THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY U/S 271 (1)(C) OF THE ACT TO THE TUNE OF RS.10,10,249/ - ON THE AMOUNT OF RS.45,02,000/ - , BEING THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT OF SALE CONSIDERATION ADOPTED IN TERMS OF SEC. 50C OF THE ACT. THE LD CIT(A), HOWEVER, DELETED THE PENALTY BY HOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.45,02,000 / - TO THE SALE CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AO ON TECHNICAL GROUND BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.50C OF THE ACT AND THE SAME WOULD NOT ATTRACT PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A), THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS A PPEAL. 4. WE NOTICE THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF RENU HINGORANI (ITA NO.2210/MUM/2010 DATED 22 - 12 - 2010), WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS EXPRESSED THE VIEW THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAD E THE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF VALUATION MADE BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY, THE SAME WOULD NOT CONCLUSIVELY PROVE THAT THE SALE CONSIDERATION AS PER THE AGREEMENT WAS INCORRECT AND WRONG. IT WAS FURTHER HELD THAT THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMIN G PROVISION DOES NOT IPSO FACTO ATTRACT PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 5. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS ALSO TAKEN IDENTICAL VIEW ON THIS MATTER AND HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH HIS ORDER. ACCORDINGLY WE CONFIRM THE ORDER P ASSED BY LD CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22 .3. 201 7. SD/ - SD/ - (RAVISH SOOD ) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MS. NANDITA MIRANI 3 MUMBAI ; DATED : 22 / 3 / 20 1 7 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRA R) PS ITAT, MUMBAI