M/s Gambhir Rice & General Mills, Jagadhri V. ITO, W-1, Yamunanagar

ITA 566/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3692 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M P DWIVEDI
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Cost of acquisition; Valuation report; Set aside; Capital Gains

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, SMC, CHANDIGARH , BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 566/CHD/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S GAMBHIR RICE & GENERAL MILLS, OLD GRAIN MARKET, JAGADHRI, YAMUNANAGAR VS. THE ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR ./PAN NO. AAAFG7608J / APPELLANT /RESPONDENT ! /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH, ADVOCATE ' ! / REVENUE BY : SH. M.P. DWIVEDI, JCIT # $ % /DATE OF HEARING : 06.11.2019 &'() % / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.11.2019 / ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.02.2019 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS)-3, LUDHIANA [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 12,25,200/- UNDER THE HEAD 'CAPITAL GAINS' WHICH IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. 2. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE RAT E OF LAND PER MARLA WAS RS.1323/- AS AGAINST RS. ITA NO. 566-CHD-2019- M/S GAMBHIR RICE & GENL MILLS, YAMUNANAGAR 2 2250/- PER MARLA TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CALCULATING THE COST OF ACQUISITION WHICH IS ARBITR ARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. 3. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF VALUATION REPORT PLACED BEFORE HER UNDER RULE 46A WITHOUT ANY REASONING WHICH IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. 4. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS, ARBITRARY, OPPOSED TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THU S UNTENABLE. 4. THE SOLE ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARDING THE COST O F ACQUISITION OF LAND AS ON 1.4.1981, SO AS TO COMPUT E THE CORRECT CAPITAL GAINS EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TAKING NOTE OF CERTAIN SALE INSTANCES HAD TAKEN THE COST OF ACQUIS ITION ON 1.4.1981 AT RS. 1323 PER MARLA AS AGAINST RS. 2122 PER MARLA CL AIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF LAND IN QUESTION, ON THE SA LE OF WHICH THE CAPITAL GAINS HAVE BEEN ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT TAKEN THE CORRECT INSTANCE OF THE SALE DEED IN THE CASE OF SOME OTHER PERSON. THAT THE SITUATION AND POSITION OF THE LAND, INSTANCE OF WH ICH HAS BEEN TAKEN NOTE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE LAND OF THE ASSESSEE. THAT THE LAND OF THE ASSESSEE WAS OF HIGHER VALUE AND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CORRECTLY TAKEN THE SAME AT RS. 2122 PER MARLA. THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THIS FACT SOUGHT TO PRODUCE A DDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) INCLUDING THE REPORT OF THE V ALUER. HOWEVER, A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) REVEALS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ITA NO. 566-CHD-2019- M/S GAMBHIR RICE & GENL MILLS, YAMUNANAGAR 3 ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SOUGHT TO BE FURNI SHED BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE VALUE OF THE LAND AS ON 1.4.1981 IS A MAT TER OF ESTIMATION AND, HENCE, IT IS REQUIRED TO BE ASCERTAINED NOT ONLY TA KING NOTE OF THE INSTANCE OF SALE OF EQUALLY SITUATED / POSITIONED LAND BUT ALSO TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE OBJECTIONS AS WELL AS SUBMIS SIONS OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING THE VALUE OF HIS LAND AS COMPARED TO THE INSTANCE TAKEN NOTE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, IN MY VIEW, THE ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCE SOUGHT TO THE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPOR T OF HIS CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. HENC E, KEEPING IN VIEW THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT( A) IS HEREBY SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO ADMIT AND CONSIDER THE EVIDENCES SOUGH T TO BE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEN TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL PROMPTLY APP EAR AND FURNISH THE NECESSARY DETAILS AND EVIDENCES AS AND WHEN CALLED FOR BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE IN ANY TYPE OF DELA Y IN THE CONCLUSION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER DICTATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IMM EDIATELY ON COMPLETION OF HEARING. SD/- ( / SANJAY GARG) / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 05.11.2019 .. ITA NO. 566-CHD-2019- M/S GAMBHIR RICE & GENL MILLS, YAMUNANAGAR 4 '+ ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. # / / CIT 4. # / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , % 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7$ / GUARD FILE '+ # / BY ORDER, 8 ' / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR