ITO, Jaipur V. SMT. LALA RAM SHARMA, Jaipur

ITA 527/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7778 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D C SHARMA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Additional evidence
• Section: 54B; 54F; 2(14); 69; 54; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH: JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. MEENA) I.T.A. NO. 527/JP/2011 ASSTT. YEAR- 2007-08 PAN NO. CMGPS 5226 N THE I.T.O., SHRI LALA RAM SHARMA, WARD 7(2), JAIPUR. VRS. VILLAGE- SANJHARIA, POST - THIKARIA, TEHSIL-SANGANER, DISTRICT- JAIPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY :- SHRI D.C. SHARMA. ASSESSEE BY :- NONE. DATE OF HEARING : 07/08/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05/09/2014 O R D E R PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28/03/2011 OF THE LEARNED C.I.T.(A)-III, JAIPUR FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION U /S 54 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS THE ACT) TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 36,19,390/-. 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD LAND TO M/S VATIKA LTD. FOR RS. 51,02,930/- BUT THIS LAN D WAS SITUATED WITHIN 8 KM AND WAS CAPITAL ASSETS U/S 2(14) OF THE ACT, WHICH IS LIABLE TO PAY LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN SIMIL AR CASES HAD ADOPTED VALUE ITA 527/JP/2011 ITO VS. LALA RAM SHARMA 2 OF LAND AS ON 01/4/1981 @ RS. 4312.56 PER BIGHA. FU RTHER THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED RS. 2,22,25,000/- IN BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH R EQUIRED TO BE EXPLAINED U/S 69 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS NON-COOPERATIVE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSED THE INCOME U/S 144 OF THE ACT. AFT ER CONSIDERING THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE WITH HIM, THE LEARNED ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAD CALCULATED THE VALUE OF LAND ON THE BASIS OF VALUE APPLIED IN CASE OF SHRI RAM NIWAS, SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SHARMA AND SHRI RAMESHWAR SHARMA. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER CALCULATED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AT RS. 2, 20,60,041/- AND DEDUCTION U/S 54B AND 54F OF THE ACT HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO T HE ASSESSEE. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSE SSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LEARNED CIT(A), WHO HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL PARTLY IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVIN G THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD LAND TO M/S VATIKA LTD. ON 07/6/2006 AT RS. 2, 22,25,000/-, WHICH WAS SITUATED AT VILLAGE SANJHARIA, POST -THIKARIA, TEHSI L-SANGANER, DISTRICT- JAIPUR. THE APPELLANT ALSO SUBMITTED VARIOUS EVIDENCES ALONG WITH REPLY DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ON WHICH REMAND REPO RT WAS CALLED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THE LAND SO LD BY THE APPELLANT WAS WITHIN 8 KM OF THE MUNICIPAL AREA AND ALSO COMES U/S 2(14) OF THE ACT AS CAPITAL ASSETS. HE ALSO JUSTIFIED THE VALUE OF LAND PER BIGHA AS ON 01/4/2981, THE ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENT IN F.Y. 1984-85 AND 19 87-88 HAD NO BASIS. ON DEDUCTION U/S 54B, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED ITA 527/JP/2011 ITO VS. LALA RAM SHARMA 3 LAND IN THE NAME OF HIS WIFE SMT. RADHA DEVI FROM SA RV SHRI BABU LAL, PAPPU LAL, KANHAIYA LAL AND RAMJI LAL FOR RS. 19,34,000/- , WHICH WAS NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE LAND WAS PURCHASED IN THE NAME OF HIS WIFE AN D NOT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE. HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF JAI NARAYAN VS. ITO (2008) 306 ITR 335. THE APPELLANT ALSO PURCHASED LAND IN HIS NAME FOR RS. 1,10,00,000 /- AND RS. 13,50,000/-, BUT WHICH HAS NOT BEEN REGISTERED AS PER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT. ACCORDING TO HIM, IT IS NOT A TRANSFER AND NO BENEFIT U/S 54B OF THE ACT CAN BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO ALLO WED DEDUCTION U/S 54F OF THE ACT AT RS. 36,19,390/- FOR CONSTRUCTION OF HOUS E ON THE BASIS OF REPORT OF M/S S.K. ASSOCIATES VALUER. 4. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LEARNED D.R. THAT THE LEARNE D CIT(A) HAD ACCEPTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND NO REMAND REPORT HAS BEEN C ALLED FOR. THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SUBMITTED ANY EVIDENCE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE. AT THE OUTSET, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NO BODY HAS APPEARED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) THAT HE HAD SOUGHT CLARIFICATION FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHI CH WAS SUBMITTED BY HIM VIDE LETTER NO. 7479 DATED 03/3/2011 AGAINST THE EV IDENCE/SUBMISSION MADE ITA 527/JP/2011 ITO VS. LALA RAM SHARMA 4 BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). THEREFOR E, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). ACCORD INGLY, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05/09/2014. SD/- SD/- (R.P. TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR, DATED : 05 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 * RANJAN COPY FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ITO, WARD 7(2), JAIPUR. 2. SHRI LALA RAM SHARMA, JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT (A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE D/R GUARD FILE (I.T.A. NO. 527/JP/2011) BY ORDER, AR ITAT JAIPUR.