M/S SHREE SAMARTHA BUILDERS, PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 6 (2) , PUNE, PUNE

ITA 534/PUN/2020

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Shri Samartha Builders appealing against the order of the CIT(A)-4, Pune, which added Rs.84,02,958 to their income under section 43CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The primary contention was the incorrect application of the stamp duty valuation rates and the failure to refer the matter to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) as required under section 43CA(2), adopting section 50C(2) and (3) of the Act. The Tribunal noted that the lower authorities had not considered the detailed evidence provided by the assessee, which included earlier executed booking agreements and part payments received, qualifying them for benefits under sections 43CA(3) and (4). Consequently, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 135561 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-12-2022
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 09-09-2020
• Other Referred Cases: Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 83 (Calcutta)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 43CA; 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण“B” ायपीठ पुणे म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं . / ITA No.534/PUN/2020 िनधा रणवष / Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Shri Samartha Builders, S.No.84/2, NDA Road, Shivane, Pune 411 023 PAN : ACAFS4108B Vs ITO, Ward-6(2), Pune Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 22-12-2022 Date of pronouncement 10-01-2023 आदेश / ORDER Per S.S.Godara, JM: This assessee’s appeal for AY 2015-16 arises against the CIT(A)-4, Pune’s order dated 11.03.2020 passed in case No. PN/CIT(A)- 4/Wd.6(2), Pune/174/2017-18, involving proceedings under 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short ‘the Act’. 2. The assessee raises the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Lower Authorities have erred in making an addition of Rs.84,02,958by invoking provision of sec 43CA of the Income Tax Act by rejecting appellant’s Contention. Appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. ITA No.534/PUN/2020 M/s. Shri Samartha Builders 2 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Lower Authorities have erred in making an addition of Rs.84,02,958 without referring the matter to DVO and without analyzing the reasons for difference between actual consideration and valuation adopted for stamp duty the action being bad in law. Such order which in consequence needs to be quashed. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Lower Authorities have erred in making an addition of Rs.84,02,958 by invoking provision of sec 43CA without appreciating sub section 3 and 4 of sec 43CA, as most of these agreements are entered in 2011 and therefore Learned AO ought to have apply stamp duty valuation rates of 2011, and in such case actual consideration is higher than stamp duty value. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Lower Authorities have erred in making an addition of Rs.84,02,958 by invoking provision of sec 43CA without appreciating the fact that in some of the cases the difference between actual consideration and ready reckoner value is less than 15% and accordingly alternatively appellant prays for proportionate relief.” 3. It emerges from a perusal of the Assessing Officer’s assessment discussion in page 3 that he has held the assessee to have transferred total 24 housing units inviting section 43CA addition of Rs.84,02,958/- in question, and that too, without making any reference to the DVO as contemplated u/s.43CA(2) adopting section 50C(2) and (3) of the Act. That being the case, we quote Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 83 (Calcutta) that such a reference u/s.50C is indeed mandatory even if there is no objection raised at the assessee’s behest. 4. Learned counsel further refers to the assessee’s detailed paper book running into 222 pages that it had not only executed booking agreements earlier but also received part payments by banking channel ITA No.534/PUN/2020 M/s. Shri Samartha Builders 3 so as to be entitled for the benefit u/s.43CA (3) and (4) of the Act. Be that as it may, we note with the able assistance of both the parties that the learned lower authorities have not considered all this voluminous evidence in their respective orders. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s sole substantive grievance back to the Assessing Officer for his fresh adjudication on merits as per law preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 5. Delay of 123 days in filing of the instant appeal instituted on 10- 09-2020 stands condoned since falling in Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 10 th January, 2023 Satish ITA No.534/PUN/2020 M/s. Shri Samartha Builders 4 आदेशक ितिलिपअ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-4, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT-3, Pune 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध,आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, “B” ब च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT,Pune. S.No Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 28-12-2022 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 29-12-2022 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order