Mr Sunit Mathur, Gurgaon V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5977/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3435 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SARAS KUMAR
• Keywords: Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 13

Judgement Text

ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 1 OF 15 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: G: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 5977/DEL/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13) MR. SUNIT MATHUR, J-502, LA LAGUNE, SECTOR-54, GURGAON. VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1), C.R. BUILDING , NEW DELHI. PAN NO: AAKPM7426N APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SARAS KUMAR, SR. DR ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM (A) THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-37, NEW DELHI, [IN SHORT, LD.CIT(A)] PERTAINING TO ASSES SMENT YEAR 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) 37, NEW DELHI AND TH E A.O. HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXEMPTION O F RS. 66,57,730.00 FROM CAPITAL GAINS BY APPLYING WRONG PROVISIONS OF LAW AS APPLICABLE IN T HIS REGARD WHICH ACT OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE ARBITRARY AND UNJUST. ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 2 OF 15 2. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) 37, NEW DELHI HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION FROM CAPITA L GAINS U/S 54(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 66,57,730.00 WHICH ACT OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUST. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) 37, NEW DELHI HAS MISR EAD AND MISAPPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 54(1) READ WITH SECTION 54(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, HOLDING THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 54(2) ARE APPLICABLE WHICH AC T OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUST. (B) VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.03.2015 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT I.T. ACT). THE RELEVANT P ORTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.03.2015 IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 3 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 4 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 5 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 6 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 7 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 8 OF 15 (C) THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). V IDE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016, LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED ASSESSEES APPEAL. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER : ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 9 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 10 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 11 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 12 OF 15 ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 13 OF 15 (D) THIS PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 OF THE LD . CIT(A). AT THE TIME OF HEARING, REVENUE WAS REPRESENTED BY SHRI SARAS KUMAR, THE LE ARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (LD. SR. DR, FOR SHORT). HOWEVER, NONE WAS PRESENT FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTA TION FROM ASSESSEES SIDE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, WE HEARD THE LD. SR. DR; WHO RELIED UPON THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2015 OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE AFORESA ID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 OF THE LD. CIT(A). AFTER PERUSAL OF THE MATERIALS ON RECORD, INCLUDING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 26.09.2016 OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED SPEAKING ORD ER ON MERITS. RELEVANT PORTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALREADY BE EN REPRODUCED IN FOREGOING PARAGRAPH (C) OF THIS ORDER. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIV EN DETAILED REASONS FOR HIS DECISION ON MERITS IN THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED AP PELLATE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 OF LD. CIT(A). DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT) NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT FOR OUR CONSIDE RATION TO PERSUADE US TO TAKE A VIEW DIFFERENT FROM THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON MERIT. AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR. DR AND AFTER PERUSAL OF MATERIA LS ON RECORD, AND FURTHER, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING DISCUSSION, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE W ITH THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 OF LD. CIT(A), AND ACCORDING LY, THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED. (E) BEFORE WE PART; WE EXPLICITLY CLARIFY THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH ITAT FOR RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL IN ACCO RDANCE WITH PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL), RULES, 1963. IF THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 14 OF 15 DOES APPROACH ITAT FOR RESTORATION OF THE APPEALS I N ITAT, THE MATTER WILL BE CONSIDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. (F) IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 06/03/2020. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (ANADEE NATH M ISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R DATED: 06/03/2020 POOJA/- COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA NO.- 5977/DEL/2016. SUNIT MATHUR. PAGE 15 OF 15 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER