M/s Subha and Prabha Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore V. ITO, Bangalore

ITA 564/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9371 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARESH SAKA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NO. 564(BANG) 2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004 05) M/S SUBHA & PRABHA DEVELOPERS (P) LTD., FLAT NO. 203, R. K. HOYSALA RESIDENCY, 3 RD MAIN, 9 TH CROSS, HOYSALANAGAR, BANGALORE 560016 PAN : AAICS5023J APPELLANT VS THE ITO, WARD 12 (2), BANGALORE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI NARESH SAKA, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 22-09-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-09-2016 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS IS DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (A) - 1 BENGALURU DATED 30.01.2014 FOR A. Y. 2004 05. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS. THE MA IN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ABOUT ADDITION OF RS. 27,42,247/- IN RESPECT OF EXC ESS OF SALE PRICE OF CERTAIN FLATS AS PER SALE AGREEMENT AND THE AMOUNT OF SALE CONSIDERATION ACCOUNTED FOR IN BOOKS. 3. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON SEVERAL DAT ES BUT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI KIRAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE. LAST OCCASION WAS ON 15.09.2016. ON THIS DATE, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 22.09.2016 AND THIS DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT. IN SPITE OF T HIS, NONE APPEARED ON 22.09.2016 AND THERE IS NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT ALSO, AND HENCE , THIS APPEAL WAS HEARD EXPARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE O RDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. I FIND THAT AS PER THE STATEMENT OF SHRI T. D. RAMAKRISHNA, M. D. OF THE A SSESSEE COMPANY ON 21.11.2005 REPRODUCED BY THE A. O. ON PAGES 4 & 5 OF THE ASSES SMENT ORDER, IT WAS EXPLAINED BY HIM ITA NO. 564BANG) 2014 2 THAT IN THESE CASES, SOME WORKS SUCH AS WOODWORK, T OILET FITTINGS, PAINTINGS, KITCHEN ARRANGEMENTS ETC. WAS NOT DONE BY THE ASSESSEE AND THESE WORKS WERE DONE BY THE PURCHASERS AND FOR THIS REASON, PRICES WERE REDUCED BELOW THE PRICE AS PER AGREEMENTS. THIS EXPLANATION WAS REJECTED BY THE A. O. AND CIT (A) ON MAINLY THIS BASIS THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED IN SUPPORT. IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ASKED TO GIVE FULL DETAILS OF SUCH FINISHING EXPENSES AND FROM THE SAME, IF THE ASSESSEE CAN ESTABLISH THAT THE EXPENSES CLAIMED ARE LESS THAN W ERE REQUIRED TO BE INCURRED IF THE ASSESSEE HAS DONE ALL REQUIRED FINISHING WORKS AS P ER AGREEMENT FOR ALL FLATS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ACTUAL FINISHING EXPENSES IN CURRED AND REQUIRED TO BE INCURRED IS NEAR TO THE REBATE ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE THAN THE CLAIM AND EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. BUT SINCE THIS EXERCISE WAS NOT DONE, I FEEL IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT (A) FOR A FR ESH DECISION. HENCE, THE ORDER OF CIT (A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO HIS FI LE FOR A FRESH DECISION WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVIDE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES ON THE LINE DISCUSSED ABOVE AND IF THE SA ME IS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, HE MAY OBTAIN REMAND REPORT FROM THE A.O. IN THAT REGARD A ND THEREAFTER, HE SHOULD PASS NECESSARY ORDER AS PER LAW AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH SIDES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. (A.K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 23.09.2016 ITA NO. 564BANG) 2014 3 AM* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S. .. 4 DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE .. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO . 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. DATE ON WHICH ORDER DOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT . 10. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 11 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER. 12 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE DISPATCH SECTION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER 13 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER